User talk:SNUGGUMS

SNUGGUMS is busy with various other websites as well as work and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

This is SNUGGUMS's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2

My talk page. Leave me messages here. Post new threads at the bottom of the page. I can also be contacted through email.

Rio concert numbers

Hello, I would like to invite you (again) to the current discussion about the Rio de Janeiro audience numbers on Lady Gaga’s talk page. Only the same people discussing. Thanks! Arlandria Ff (talk) 02:27, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to decline when I personally have nothing else to add after already giving my thoughts there earlier, Arlandria Ff, and am not sure how long the thread will continue for. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:56, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

39 edits that removed links to the redirect Search Engine Land

Hi SNUGGUMS. Please revert your 39 edits that removed links to the redirect Search Engine Land. This internal link is useful for readers because Search Engine Land redirects to Danny Sullivan (technologist)#Search Engine Land, which gives information about the website. In response to "doesn't have or appear to warrant own article", the guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Redirects says it is fine to link to redirects. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 21:09, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced it's beneficial to link to something unlikely to warrant a separate page. Who would be looking for Sullivan when instead searching for that Engine Land anyway? SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:59, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Search Engine Land redirects to Danny Sullivan (technologist)#Search Engine Land, which says:

In 2006 Sullivan founded Search Engine Land with Chris Sherman. Search Engine Land is a news website that covers search engine marketing and search engine optimization. It which shares information about keyword research, trends in search marketing (SEM), paid search advertising (PPC) and search engine optimization (SEO) as well as analysis, advice, tips, tactics and how-to guides for search marketing.
Search Engine Land and other Third Door Media brands were acquired by Semrush in October, 2024.

This provides the reader useful information about Search Engine Land and is why a link is beneficial. Cunard (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you self-revert these link removals? Thank you. Cunard (talk) 07:52, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unless that term gets discussed within another article's prose, that doesn't seem as helpful as you believe it would be. When possible, linking to terms actually containing separate articles is preferable to do. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:56, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unless that term gets discussed within another article's prose, that doesn't seem as helpful as you believe it would be. – I don't understand this statement as the term Search Engine Land is discussed within the prose of Danny Sullivan (technologist)#Search Engine Land. I've explained that linking to a redirect is helpful to readers in this case in providing background information about what Search Engine Land is. Linking to redirects supported by the guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Redirects. I don't see a policy-based reason to remove these links. Would you please self-revert these link removals? Cunard (talk) 21:15, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When it looks like the instances I unlinked were only contained within citations, it's not like a page said anything about Search Engine Land that would intrigue viewers to learn more about that. Unlinking within references is hardly something to worry about, especially compared to taking out text discussing the engine. With that in mind, adding such links is of little to no help. Going out of one's way to knowingly insert redirect links instead of actual page links doesn't exactly improve things much if at all. WP:Linking dos and don'ts discourages linking to unexpected targets, and I doubt anybody who did click the term would expect to end up seeing Sullivan's bio. On another note, restoring those would give a misleading impression that this engine has its own article or has a good chance of meriting one in the foreseeable future. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:52, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As we have been unable to come to an agreement, I started an RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should links to the redirect Search Engine Land be restored?. Cunard (talk) 22:34, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently I underestimated your determination and persistence on this matter. To be honest, you didn't need to go out of your way to start that up. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:40, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Emily Neves § Basic info: Middle name, date of birth, etc

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Emily Neves § Basic info: Middle name, date of birth, etc. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:10, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts can be found on the thread now. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 11:10, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've also opened a discussion at Talk:Emily Neves#B-class/GA-class efforts, if you are interested in helping out. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:49, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While the invite is appreciated, I'm going to decline on that. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:18, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Peanuts § GA/FA?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Peanuts § GA/FA?. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:15, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a few days late, but I did take a glance and left some quick thoughts on the talk page. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing for track listings

I assume what Camilasdandelions (talk · contribs) was referring to here is MOS:ALBUM stating while one can cite the liner notes explicitly, it is "generally assumed and does not need explicit citation in most cases" that credits are taken from the liner notes. However, it also says "If an editor thinks that a reference is necessary, Template:Cite AV media notes can be used" and you've done that. Just explaining. Skyversay (talk) 14:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:ALBUM is only an essay, Skyversay, and therefore doesn't take precedence over policies or even guidelines. It most definitely shouldn't be treated as a free pass to ignore Verifiability requirements. I also don't recommend merely assuming things are taken from liner notes. That's lazy at best and a cheap cop-out. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just told you that's likely what Camilasdandelions is referring to. You're entitled to your opinion even if that's not the current case for most track listings on Wikipedia. I have no interest in arguing with you. Skyversay (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

True, and I was suggesting that the user's removal rationale was dubious. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starring/Stars/Starred

Thanks for your follow up edit to Jennifer Lawrence. I've often wondered about this. If MOS:FILMNOW says we refer to the film as something that currently exists, do the starring actors still not star? Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:15, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In case it wasn't clear before, Escape Orbit, my change simply was indicating that J-Law has finished her work on films (including series like X-Men and The Hunger Games). This has no bearing on the existence of them. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Katy's new single

Hi! Katy just posted the pre-save link of her new single with the title "bandaids". Should we start working on the article? The song credits are also accessible now, and fortunately, Dr. Luke is out. 143kittypurry (talk) 15:00, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Too soon for a main space article until the song gets released, 143kittypurry; I recommend starting a draft first. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It will be released tomorrow! [1][2] 143kittypurry (talk) 16:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely sooner than I expected! Even so, mere run-of-the-mill announcements wouldn't be enough to warrant a big page when there isn't yet much to say about the song itself aside from a release day. Same goes for any notice on a music video prior to the track coming out. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 20:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She's set to premiere her new song at her Paris show of the Lifetimes Tour today! The music video has already been filmed and has been playing on the tour screen in some show segments for the past couple of days. Let's wait for more information to come before starting the article, if needed! 143kittypurry (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]