User talk:GogoGrande

GogoGrande, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi GogoGrande! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like ChamithN (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:09, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Ariana songs stylization

Hi! Please join the discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Songs#Ariana_Grande_song_title_stylizations and help us reach a consensus. Thanks. — Artmanha (talk) 00:20, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Sleeper hit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 00:49, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peaking at number 49 on the Billboard Hot 100 or 79 on the Billboard 200 are not hits in general, much less sleeper-hits. I thought less notable releases should have been removed from the list. GogoGrande (talk) 00:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are speaking of chart hits, not sleeper hits. Sources should be cited, not opinions. The sources verified they are in fact sleeper hits. They became successful by steadily selling or growing popular over time--which the peak position of a weekly record chart would not be able to measure--rather than immediately or in a concentrated period--which it would measure. Dan56 (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to So Am I (Ava Max song). Serols (talk) 07:00, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was literally an accident, I didn’t paste my edit correctly I- GogoGrande (talk) 07:03, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

Hello, I'm IdreamofJeanie. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Vagina have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block-evading sockpuppet

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.

@Yamla unsure of what's happening but i only own one account, not a sockpuppet. GogoGrande (talk) 00:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

sorry but the text isn't appearing on my page, can you please explain why I've been blocked? i am legitimately confused.. GogoGrande (talk) 00:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The claim made over at User talk:Sidetosice is that you have control of both accounts. Is that not correct? --Yamla (talk) 11:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We have determined that your claim here to "only own one account, not a sockpuppet" is false. We have also determined that your claim to control Arivgao is false, and an attempt to get an innocent user blocked. As you have lost access to your talk page on your main account and as you are not eligible for unblock consideration here, I will revoke your talk page access here. --Yamla (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sidetosice, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.