Hi CAMERAwMUSTACHE! 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 16:05, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Yo it’s me justdancehere didn’t know you were on Wikipedia lol. I’m also a fan Lotsoflolzandbloxs ( talk) 03:19, 18 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi CAMERAwMUSTACHE! You created a thread called Single vs. Other Charted Songs at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{ bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{ nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot ( talk) 19:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC) reply

There is only a vague connection between PewDiePie and the three journalists. I see no reason to put the {{ for}} template on each of the journalist's articles, as if someone would go do one of their pages when they are actually looking for the fictional character. The connection is not only vague, but it is unreferenced. -- rogerd ( talk) 20:36, 2 June 2019 (UTC) reply

I mean, I was just bored and noticed Harlow and Borger had the template, but not Ham. If by unreferenced you mean lack of citations a reference for Harlow and Borger being examples of his characters can be found on the PewDiePie page, reference number 142 (it’s a Newsweek article). Ham is a new character of his so I don’t know if there are any articles about it. If by unreferenced you mean “not in the article” I mean stuff in the “for” template usually isn’t in an article if all they share is a name, like Old Town Road and the train station. As for no one going to the article for the real person looking for the fictional character keep in mind that these characters are being used in videos watched by a worldwide audience including younger viewers who may not realize that the characters are real people. I had never heard of any of the real-life versions of these characters until I looked them up on Wikipedia and found them. I don’t see how having the template on the pages would hurt anyone and in my opinion the clearer it is the better.

With all that being said, however, I honestly don’t care what happens to any of these articles. I was just trying to help by following the style of the other articles (Harlow and Borger) with the new character. The template had been on those articles for a while, too, so excuse me for trying to help. Do whatever to the templates, remove them, keep them, move them, whatever, you’re the way more experienced editor. I won’t undo it. Just be sure to tell this to whoever added the templates to the Borger and Harlow pages in the first place because the template being on both those pages is what prompted me to add it to Ham.

CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 23:57, 2 June 2019 (UTC) reply

I understand. I can see that. I am not really familiar with this PewDiePie character, although I think I remember about some controversies with him some time ago. I didn't know about the connection with these journalists, but if you think it could be useful to leave the redirect there, I guess there isn't any harm. -- rogerd ( talk) 02:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC) reply

WP:Twinkle may be of interest to you for reverting edits. It's a JavaScript tool that can help you quickly revert vandalism, notify users that have vandalized, and even report vandalizing users.

If not, there are plenty other gadgets you could use, such as WP:Huggle. These are just suggestions; you don't necessarily have to use them. They're just faster vandalism counters. Thissecretperson ( talk) 12:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC) reply

I think I need to hit 500 edits to use that or something

CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 14:14, 7 June 2019 (UTC) reply

You’re correct - but that’s fine! Once you reach 500 edits you can always enable Twinkle, and it will make reverting vandalism easier. You’re close to 500 edits, so you’re a few steps in. Thissecretperson ( talk) 16:48, 7 June 2019 (UTC) reply

Just a little reminder to add the corresponding number of colons (:) at the beginning of each reply you write, per WP:DISCUSSION. This will be easier for editors to distinguish who writes which part of a talk page discussion. Thank you! Thissecretperson ( talk) 02:00, 3 July 2019 (UTC) reply

There's... there's literally instances of me doing this above you...

CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:32, 3 July 2019 (UTC) reply

And one of them is in a response to you lol. But yeah I think I did forget it on the 2020 page. When I'm replying on mobile I forget about those things.

CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:34, 3 July 2019 (UTC) reply

Yeah, I was talking about that specific page. Just a small reminder! Thissecretperson ( talk) 14:19, 3 July 2019 (UTC) reply

When you start a draft, you should either wait for it to be reviewed as part of the AfC process or ask someone else to move it. It's frowned upon to move your own draft when you've chosen to start a draft subject to the AfC process. Wikipedia:Drafts is referring to "anybody", meaning those who didn't start the draft and feel the draft should be moved. Also, as I said in my edit summary upon moving the article, we do not use the ellipsis character. Three typed-out dots are always preferred in article titles because readers can't type an ellipsis character. That is generated in word processors et al when one types three dots so is non-standard. Ss 112 02:17, 10 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello, I am sorry for any problems that were caused in the creation of the page as it was my first real page to be creating. However, I would like to point out that Wikipedia:Drafts does not explicitly state that the draft’s creator cannot move the page to main space—I made sure of this before making the move. It only states that it “requires an editor to use the page move function to move it into the Main (article) namespace” and “Editors may also optionally submit drafts for review via the articles for creation process.” Additionally, the beginning of the page states that “creating a Draft version first is optional,” which means that even if I was not allowed to move the page from Draft to mainspace myself, it would have been moot because I would have been allowed to start in the mainspace. I only started in draft space because I had other obligations and I was unsure if I would be able to complete the article in one shot. As for the elipses thing, I was aware of that, too, as I started the draft with three individual dots and only moved it to the mainspace with the single elipses (…) because the page with three dots was occupied by a redirect to Social House. I know copy edits (or whatever Wikipedia calls cutting and pasting from one page to another instead of renaming) are frowned upon and I was trying to avoid that, as well as any double redirects. Because of this, I made sure the page with three dots (as well as “Everything Changed (EP)”) was changed to redirect to the new one. Of course, efforts to keep these redirects in line backfired as when you changed it back, you (inadvertently) made the … page an infinite redirect (i.e., redirecting onto itself). Next time, I will start in the mainspace to avoid this conflict.

Thank you for correcting my rookie mistakes,

CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 05:09, 10 August 2019 (UTC) reply

https://imgur.com/a/PkI480z i noticed you reverted one of my edits so here is some proof, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.60.161.59 ( talk) 09:05, 19 October 2019 (UTC) reply

While it looks like that’s legit, I don’t think an Imgur link is sufficient for Wikipedia. The source must be from an established resource, see WP:VER for more information. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 16:36, 19 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

So yesterday, I had made edits on several artists discography pages. For some odd reason you reverted several. So let me explain, an artists “Lead Singles” is the only number that should be placed in the template box, lead singles should not be combined with featured singles, featured singles aren’t technically the artists, they are just a feature, the song isn’t being released under their name nor their label. So for you to come to my talk page and accuse me of vandalism is highly inappropriate. And if you once again find it odd that way please feel free to find a source that says the singles need to be combined cuz me and an admin had tried looking and couldn’t find anything.... and by the way if you’re going to combine the singles please actually learn how to count, the numbers are still wrong. Pillowdelight ( talk) 17:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC) reply

I resent your accusations that I am the one who needs to learn how to count, as well as the accusations that I do not know what I am doing. I have created multiple discography pages from scratch, based on existing discography pages of well-established artists with very detailed and complete discography tables. I undid your edit because a more experienced editor undid your edits first. When I saw you edit the page again before that user could get to it, I undid it again. When I see someone adding information--without explanation mind you--that can clearly be disproven by scrolling down and counting, I assume it is vandalism and/or the addition of false information. Combine that with the fact that someone warned you for doing this before led to the leaving of the warning message on your wall that may have been a higher level than you were expecting. Additionally, I have read the manuals of style-- I read them before I created my first discography table to avoid any altercations like this-- and they don't say anything about singles not needing to be combined either. The general consensus appears to be to use a combined total to represent an artist's entire discography in the lede (i.e., "The discography of _ consists of X singles (including Y as a featured artist)") with the combined total in the infobox. Additionally, the infobox does not specify "as lead artist" so all singles should be included. Features are legitimate appearances and to say that they "aren't technically the artists" does not make sense. While this would make sense for uncredited appearances that only consist of backing vocals, it does not make sense when the featured artist is credited, has a verse or other significant contribution to the song, and is very clearly a part of the song. Taking out such a large portion of these artists' discographies is simply incorrect. And finally, I followed Wikipedia guidelines when reverting your edits. I undid the edits, left a summary, and contacted you using a message outlined as per WP:WARNVAND, since switching single counts for seemingly no reason looks like vandalism or at the minimum the addition of false information. The reason I went straight to level three was because of your similar edits and the fact that you were warned for this before and just kept going. For you to contact me out of the blue with these accusations is not civil. While I admit I neglected to double-check on some of the articles that the counts were accurate prior to your edits (people sometimes forget to update the count sometimes, it happens) for you to come here and tell me to "learn how to count" is just plain rude. As a final note I would also like to point that the administrator you contacted could not find anything that say they should not be combined either so to come here and imply that they proved your point is kind of misleading. I hope this clears things up. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 18:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC) reply

I wouldn’t even consider the edits I made considered to be “vandalism” I do apologize if I did come off harsh, I was just extremely frustrated. I have seen some infobox templates set up as “Lead Singles” and with “Featured Singles” I was going to add in “Featured Singles” but figured I wouldn’t since there was already a “Singles” option then in the description typically says “(Including __ featured singles)” which I would fix with the correct number since there typically a few numbers off, that’s why I had given a response to saying learn how to count because I had counted the singles both lead and featured and they would still be wrong after you had reverted them. Again, I apologize for that. Pillowdelight ( talk) 20:59, 7 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pop Smoke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Good Intentions ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

— Wug· a·po·des​ 01:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Thanks for help to revert vandalism on Pop Smoke's article. Do you know how to request a semi-protection for his article? The Ultimate Boss ( talk) 00:53, 10 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Yeah you can request it at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 00:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi CAMERAwMUSTACHE. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox ( talk) 16:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Single cover art is same as deluxe cover art, one day before album release. I'm pretty sure this makes it qualify as a promotional single? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThesePicklesLoveSosa ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 26 May 2021 (UTC) reply

No source stating it is a promo single. Please provide a reliable source. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 19:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC) reply

It actually seems that everywhere promotional singles are listed on Wikipedia, they don't have sources stating they are promotional singles. I think it's just known that it's a promotional single, and that a source isn't needed. ThesePicklesLoveSosa ( talk) 19:39, 26 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Your edits change sourced content without explanation nor a source and sometimes conflict with sources given. This violates several of Wikipedia’s rules regarding content. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 19:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Nessa Barrett. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 28#Nessa Barrett until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 01:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC) reply

You took down my edit for not having any citation, and I have reuploaded the edit with a citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 999wrldwelive ( talk • contribs) 15:15, 28 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Can you please redirect the page Lil Duke to YSL Records? He is a member of the label and has been for like 7 years. Thank you. 108.217.3.222 ( talk) 00:56, 3 June 2021 (UTC) reply

I think I will have him redirect to Slime Language 2 for the time being since that appears to be his most notable appearance that I can find. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:04, 3 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Alright, cool. I hope I’m not asking too much. Look at these articles: Durag Activity, Ramen & OJ, and His & Hers (song); these 3 articles need single covers if you can get them. And then could you redirect Top Chef Gotit to Lil Gotit? That’s his upcoming album that releases next week. 108.217.3.222 ( talk) 00:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC) reply

If I get a chance I’ll get to them but I primarily just watch out for vandals. You might be better off waiting or creating an account and doing them yourself. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 01:09, 4 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Can you try please? I’m asking because I spent hard work making them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.217.3.222 ( talk) 01:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC) reply

I have other commitments and I primarily edit on mobile so I can’t put cover art at the right size or in the right format unless I’m on PC. And that Lil Gotit album needs evidence of notability before it can be created. If you really need these edits done, go ask someone at WikiProject Songs. Or ask on the talk pages of these articles. Or create an account and do it yourself. I don’t know why you’re asking me in particular. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 04:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Hey! So you might know that Nav the rapper is also a producer. He has produced lots of songs for other artists too, such as Drake’s “ Back to Back”, and some songs Gucci Mane and Kodak Black too.

Can you please start 2 categories: “Category:Albums produced by Nav (rapper)” and “Category:Song recordings produced by Nav (rapper)”? Thank you so much! 68.203.223.30 ( talk) 23:00, 6 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Please use Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories for any category creation requests. I do not take such requests unless I was already planning on making something like that. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 04:14, 7 August 2021 (UTC) reply

In his latest video with Anthony Padilla titled "I Spent A Day with TheOdd1sOut" from the timestamp 4:02 onwards (YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pbzyOU7nUM&t=264s) he did mention that the previous photo was without his nor Anthony's consent and the newer photo was allowed to be on his Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EtnaPandaBanana ( talk • contribs) 06:37, 16 November 2021 (UTC) reply

I see. Unfortunately, he does not mention a specific license so I’m not sure if that is enough under the image policy. I suggest going through WP:FFU or telling James (or Anthony) to make the request directly with Wikipedia through WP:OTRS. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 17:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC) reply

You reverted my edit here, making the allegation I was committing vandalism in the edit summary. I don't commit any sort of vandalism, never mind the blatantly obvious kind that can be easily explained in an edit summary with the typical outcome of a swift IP/account block. Needless to say, I am curious as to why you summarized your edit as 'rv vandalism.' -- I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 05:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

The IP vandalized. They’ve been vandalizing. Your edit was just fixing the disambiguations that were added that shouldn’t have been added in the first place. I just went and reverted back to before the IP vandalized, I did not mean to accuse you specifically of vandalism. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 06:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

After a second look, you're right. I'm sorry. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 06:10, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Eh, it’s still partially on me, I probably should’ve been clearer in the edit summary. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 06:16, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Right, but still. No use lingering, though. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 06:19, 13 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi. I saw your to In My Head (Lil Tjay song) and just wanted to say that in most cases, Billboard's "Hits of the World" charts for a lot of different countries come secondary to the main charts of those countries. There's no need to include them if the country's official charts are already listed. Thanks. Ss 112 02:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC) reply

I disagree since the methodology differs and it’s common to include charts from multiple sources within the same country (such as Record World, Billboard, Cash Box, and Rolling Stone all being accepted for the States and Oricon and Billboard being accepted for Japan, etc.). I think it is more reliable in some cases as, depending on the country, the local chart is airplay-only or sales only. Especially with the UK Songs Chart, as it doesn’t have the OCC’s three per artist limit and their really annoying stream deflation, it provides what I think is a more accurate gauge of song performance. I’ve tried bringing the HOTW charts up at WT:CHARTS but no one seems to want to discuss it. But whatever. I’ve got better things to do anyway. Still open to discussing at WT:CHARTS tho. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:15, 17 April 2022 (UTC) reply

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for helping stop the vandals from vandalizing Wikipedia! Users like you are very much appreciated! Dontmesswithme100 ( talk) 01:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Hey, I was wondering if you know where one could access the post-2019 ARIA Reports? I'm not trying to source them or anything. Would just be interested in seeing them. ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

I’m not really sure, as Billboard is more my wheelhouse. I’m not that familiar with ARIA charts but I think I know what you’re referring to just not sure where to find them digitally. I think they are only available physically. You might have to check with someone like User talk:Ss112. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 15:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

OK, I appreciate it very much. Thank you! ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 03:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Camera, I'm mad at you for reverting on the Megan Thee Stallion page. Why and how do you think that the term "known professionally as" is better than "better known by his stage name"? It's not. There both the same definition. It's just that the the term "known professionally as" is overused in many articles. That's all. Your not making any sense at all. SuperSuperSonic207 ( talk) 00:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

First, please calm down and remain civil. Second, as I have said in my edit summary, it flows better and is more direct to the point. She uses it in her professional life, beyond the stage. Something being “overused” is not a valid justification to remove something. How stuff is written on other pages is not a valid argument, please see WP:OTHERCONTENT. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 00:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

How does "known professionally as" flows better more direct to the point, beyond the stage? Yeah, she uses it in her professional life, but you can't say "known professionally as" is better than "better known by his stage name", because there both similar terms. That's all. So it doesn't make the difference. SuperSuperSonic207 ( talk) 02:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

If one is not better than the other, as you claim here, then there is no reason for the change to be made in the first place and the existing wording should just be left there. I have already stated that it flows better and is more direct and to the point. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Your not making any sense at all. Your only saying that it flows better, but I'm asking how and that's it. No any information says "known professionally as" is better than "better known by his stage name", and when does it say it flows better and more direct? What does that even mean too? Nothing. SuperSuperSonic207 ( talk) 02:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

I have explained my point and reasoning multiple times. It’s more direct and flows better because it has a more professional tone and uses less words, and because it’s way more than just a stage name, it is more of a professional name since she uses it professionally, not just on the stage. However, since you yourself think that one is not any better than the other, I’m not sure what we’re even arguing about or why you’re even making the change in the first place as by your own logic your edits aren’t any better. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 11:05, 30 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Dont put this image of Peso Pluma don’t care if he had copyrigth Javierc25 ( talk) 02:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply

He will have to provide written permission. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:35, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Put another image we gonna delete this image put a better quality or dont put nothing Javierc25 ( talk) 02:40, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Per Wikipedia policy, any image you replace it with will have to be under a compatible license. Please see the image use policy. As the image you are removing is under a compatible license, it should not be removed. CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk) 02:44, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Three Little Birds by Maroon 5.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 19:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply