User talk:Newpicarchive

Hi Newpicarchive! I noticed your contributions to Anti World Tour and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Fragrant Peony (talk) 10:46, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Tottenham Hotspur Stadium—because it 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Your statement "but what about Lady Gaga???" is a prime example of Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFF. Please check Wikipedia's WP: EXPLICITGENRE, or i will have to take this situation into an administrator report. DollysOnMyMind (talk) 07:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

There's a discussion regarding your edits on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentsDollysOnMyMind (talk) 09:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at List of best-selling music artists shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. TheWikiholic (talk) 15:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qaqaamba. I noticed that you removed topically relevant content from Beyoncé. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Qaqaamba (talk) 11:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at The Eras Tour, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not add about the Paris show being an exception. That has discussed already, and we need to stick to the sources provided, as all of the sources state it so. If none of the sources say anything about it being an arena or an exception, that statement should not be included. HorrorLover555 (talk) 12:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Newpicarchive. Thank you. HorrorLover555 (talk) 15:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. TheWikiholic (talk) 23:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Newpicarchive. I notice that you are very active on Beyonce articles so i hope you don't mind me approaching you specifically, to get your opinion. There has been a change in the lede paragraph and it now reads as the following:

"Nicknamed "Queen Bey", she is regarded as a prominent cultural figure of the 21st century. Throughout her two-decade career, Beyoncé has been recognized for her distinctive vocal range and live concert performances. Rolling Stone named her the world's greatest living entertainer in 2022, and one of the greatest vocalists of all time in 2023."

I think the specific reference to her distinctive vocal range and live concerts is a good addition. But i'm not sure if the whole thing gels and of course, her career has been longer than 2 decades. I may open up a discussion on the talkpage, because i don't think we as a collective have gotten the lede paragraph quite right. IMO, it doesn't easily "flow". How about something like this as an alternative:

"Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter (/biˈɒnseɪ/ ⓘ bee-ON-say;[6] née Knowles; born September 4, 1981)[7] is an American singer, songwriter, and businesswoman. Nicknamed "Queen Bey", she has been noted for her distinctive vocal range, artistic versatility and live concert performances. Regarded as a prominent cultural figure, Rolling Stone named her the world's greatest living entertainer and one of the greatest vocalists of all time."

or maybe something like this?

"Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter (/biˈɒnseɪ/ ⓘ bee-ON-say;[1] née Knowles; born September 4, 1981)[2] is an American singer, songwriter, and businesswoman.  Nicknamed "Queen Bey" and the "First Lady of Music", she is often regarded as a prominent cultural figure. Noted for her distinctive vocal range, versatility and live concert performances, Rolling Stone named her the world's greatest living entertainer in 2022, and one of the greatest vocalists of all time".

I would love to get your opinion and any suggestions of your own, or do you think the current lede is fine as it is and she be left alone?. Look forward to a reply. Many thanks Koppite1 (talk) 09:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I believe the last submission is more appropriate, neutral and straightforward. Also it would be more accurate to state that she is one of the highest-selling artists in history with 200 Million records sold, as this is a more objective claim than the title "The Greatest Vocalist/Entertainer of All Time" given to her by Rolling Stone. While I personally agree with that title/statement, but it is ultimately subjective. Newpicarchive (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I agree that it would be preferable to have facts in the first paragraph of the lede, as opposed to subjective opinions which is what the Rolling Stone ranking is. The first sentence in the last paragraph of the lede reads "Having sold 200 million records worldwide, Beyoncé is one of the best-selling music artists of all time". Perhaps that should moved to the first paragraph of the lede, replacing the Rolling Stone accolade? So, using the current opening paragraph, it would now read:

Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter (/biˈɒnseɪ/ ⓘ bee-ON-say; née Knowles; born September 4, 1981) is an American singer, songwriter, and businesswoman. Nicknamed "Queen Bey", she is regarded as a prominent cultural figure of the 21st century. Throughout her two-decade career, Beyoncé has been recognized for her distinctive vocal range and live concert performances. Having sold 200 million records worldwide, Beyoncé is one of the best-selling music artists of all time.

I would then propose to put the Rolling Stone sentence at the bottom of the lede, just before "Time included her as one of the 100 women who has so far defined the 21st century."

I would appreciate your opinion on this. Thank you. Koppite1 (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good Newpicarchive (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Many of your recent edits are incorrectly sourced, for example Special:Diff/1263220718, Special:Diff/1263220436 (which completely missed the table) and all other certifications. Please check that your edits provide a working source. Muhandes (talk) 09:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Texas Hold 'Em (song), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Muhandes (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Newpicarchive (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I am seeking clarification regarding the legitimate reason for the blockage of my account. My actions were solely aimed at preventing vandalism on certain pages related to Beyoncé, as I have encountered an individual who engages in such behavior and accuses others of similar actions when they attempt to intervene. Additionally, I had forgotten the password for my original account and subsequently created a new one until I regained access to the former. I assure you that neither account was intended to violate Wikipedia's guidelines; I simply use two different phones to log in. I apologize if my actions have been perceived as rule violations, but my intention has always been to safeguard Beyoncé's pages from disruptive edits by detractors. Furthermore, I can confirm that both "Thedayandthetime" and "DefenderNY," the latter of whom has been blocked from editing, are the same individual. This person frequently engages with Shakira's pages, likely as a fan, while also participating in disruptive editing on pages related to Beyoncé and reporting anyone who against him. Newpicarchive (talk) 01:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Firstly, if you wish to appeal your block, then appeal your block and do it properly as instructed in WP:GAB. Secondly, don't obfuscate by talking about other users and their actions; this block is about you.

The reason for your block is that you have been using multiple user accounts, and doing so in parallel flipping between the accounts sometimes with only minutes between (meaning your excuse of having forgotten the password clearly doesn't stack up), and doing this on dozens of article as well as talk pages.

I am declining your appeal, since it neither addresses the block reasons nor persuades me that you are being open and honest with us. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Newpicarchive (talk) 01:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Newpicarchive (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I am reaching out to formally request the reconsideration of my account suspension, fully acknowledging my previous actions. I am genuinely seeking a second opportunity to make a positive contribution to Wikipedia. My previous actions were motivated by a desire to combat disruptive editing and vandalism on Beyoncé's related pages by her detractors, as I encountered an individual who not only engaged in such behavior but also accused others of similar misconduct when they attempted to intervene. I deeply regret my actions and understand their impact on the community's integrity. — Regarding the issue of my forgotten password, I had indeed lost access to my original account and created a new one while I worked to regain access. I assure you that neither account was created with the intention of violating Wikipedia's policies; I simply use two different phones for logging in, both of which keep me logged in for up to a year due to my daily usage of both devices.

I have developed a greater understanding of the responsibilities that come with editing Wikipedia and am committed to taking these responsibilities seriously moving forward. Upon the removal of my block, I plan to delete my second account (ShakiraFandom) and exclusively use my original account to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines regarding WP:SOCK. I sincerely regret my past actions and respectfully request the opportunity to demonstrate that I can be a responsible and constructive member of the Wikipedia community. Thank you for considering my request.Newpicarchive (talk) 09:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I recommend you take the standard offer and re-apply in 6 months time with no more abuse of multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 12:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Newpicarchive, the technical timeline of your actions shows that you have intentionally used multiple accounts on the same device in this dispute. I also suspect AI was involved in writing the request. Be honest and use your own words. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

ToBeFree, This is the first time my account has lost editing privileges. I genuinely apologize if my actions were seen as violations of Wikipedia's guidelines and rules. I respectfully ask for a second chance to regain access to my account. As I mentioned before, I am willing to delete my secondary account if my account can be reinstated. My intention is not to cause any harm, but to protect against disruptive editing and vandalism on pages related to Beyoncé, especially from individuals pretending to be neutral Wikipedia editors. English is not my first language, these are indeed my words I tried to structure my words as formally as possible in order to appeal for unblocking.

I won't review your block again, but just to say that your excuse of having lost your password really doesn't explain any of this. You registered the second account, and within 1.5 hrs of that were back to using this account, and then continued using both side-by-side for over a year. If there was no intent to deceive, you would have stopped using the new account as soon as you regained access to the older one. Or if you wanted to use both in parallel, you could have, and should have, clearly indicated that they are alt accounts, but you didn't. Latest in July 2024 when you were reported to SPI (case subsequently withdrawn, because the filer believed your story) you would have dropped the second account, but didn't. And to say now that you've been found out that you'll stop using the second account is too late, IMO.

Unless the next admin to come along to review your appeal accepts it, my advice would be to admit that you were intentionally socking, and go for the standard offer. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Renaissance World Tour while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 19:55, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

---

@ToBeFree: They are editing logged out now as the IP 182.3.47.186. Both are from Indonesia 1, both use mobile edits only, both edit the articles Renaissance World Tour and Cowboy Carter Tour, and both demand that Beyonce be referred to as "American singer and songwriter" instead of just "American singer" in album articles 1, 2 --FMSky (talk) 12:46, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping! If it's block evasion, do feel free to revert (WP:3RRNO#3) and maybe request page protection if it persists. I have taken the simple path of blocking the IP address for edit warring for 2 weeks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:12, 30 March 2025 (UTC)