User talk:GothGrrrl

Welcome!

Hello, GothGrrrl, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!Nrswanson (talk) 19:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent additions of crossover artist articles

In case you were wondering why these articles were nominated for deletion, these articles exsisted before and were deleted by a Wikipedia: Articles for deletion. You will have to go back and look at that AFD ruling to see why. Best of luck to your editing and I hope this doesn't frustrate you. If you have any questions feel free to contact me on my talk page. Have a good day.Nrswanson (talk) 19:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation of deleted material

Hi GothGrrrl. I'm sorry but I had to remove those lists from Voice classification in non-classical music‎. Material deleted by an AFD ruling should not be recreated under a different article unless the reasons for said deletion have been properly addressed which in this case they haven't. Problems with said lists were largely related to the impossible task of verifying the truth of such lists. Most contemporary artists do not identify themselves with standard voice type definitions. As a result, such lists are highly unstable and create edit wars. That is only one of several problems identified. I suggest you go back and look at the AFD discussion and ruling which is quite lengthy.Nrswanson (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your suggestion, although creative, is highly unlikely to be approved. Protecting pages for an extended period of time is rarely done (there are only a couple examples) and in this case not warranted. The major issue with lists of crossover artists is verifying the accuracy or truth of such a list. The lists you created had no independent third party sources and therefore protecting such a list would be pointless unless multiple independent sources can be found.Nrswanson (talk) 21:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Lee

Hi GothGrrrl, welcome to Wikipedia. I've reverted your changes to Amy Lee, because the site you referenced was just a random person's blog, and does not count as a valid source (since it is not fact-checked, for one). Further, the area of the page where you found "mezzo-soprano" was a fairly old copy of the Wikipedia article that the blog-owner copied to his webpage. Anyhow, I just wanted to explain why I reverted. Cheers! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, unfortunately, I've again removed Mezzo-soprano from the article. Wikipedia doesn't accept blogs and other wiki (such as the site you referenced) as sources, because they, like Wikipedia, are written by non-experts...just normal folk like you and me. I'd suggest you check out Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability for notes on what sources are acceptable and what aren't (particularly WP:SOURCES). If you have any questions, just leave a note on my talk page. Cheers! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 09:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GothGrrrl, it is again reverted, as IMDB is also written by individuals. It is sort of like Wikipedia, except that submissions are moderated by people to make sure "trash" doesn't get in. As far as I'm aware, no fact-checking goes on. May I suggest, look for information in news articles, journals, similar type places (material written by respectable authors who fact-check their material). Instead of just submitting it, perhaps leave a message on my talk page with a link, and I'll let you know whether it is a reasonable source. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 02:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Voice type sourcing

It is unacceptable practice to remove sourced content because you "know" it isn't correct, or you think it isn't right. You must provide reliable 3rd party sourcing when making such changes, regardless of what you think or know. Changes such as these [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] removed cited material and may be considered vandalism. Also, adding such material, as you did here and here also require a citation from a reliable 3rd party source. Please either adhere to policy or stop making such changes. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your lists of famous people with [so and so] hair

Refrain from adding these lists to articles. You keep getting reverted by me and others, per what is stated at Talk:Blond#List of famous people with blonde hair about this. If you continue to add these lists, your conduct in this regard will be reported and you will likely be blocked (even if only temporarily) if you do not stop doing this. Flyer22 (talk) 02:02, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't bring your grudges from other Wikipedias here

I'm sorry you've had a bad experience at it.wikipedia. However, the English Wikipedia is not your place to vent about it. Accordingly, I've removed your comment from Talk:Katy Perry. —C.Fred (talk) 20:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GothGrrrl. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Rs chen 7754 07:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]