MFTP Dan

I tend to ramble a lot to the point I get incoherent in content debates sometimes. If I say anything totally confusing or even mean-sounding, I probably didn't mean it that way, so just let me know and we'll work it out.

I usually am open to help with Peer reviews, specific FAC areas, and GAN second opinions. If I am urgently needed, my Discord handle is @american_horse. I am on Wikipedia's official server where I am nicknamed the same as my username here, but I usually am not active there (unless pinged).

DYK for Cute Without the 'E' (Cut from the Team)

On 12 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cute Without the 'E' (Cut from the Team), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Taking Back Sunday's emo single "Cute Without the 'E' (Cut from the Team)" was influenced by rapper Jay-Z? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cute Without the 'E' (Cut from the Team). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cute Without the 'E' (Cut from the Team)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Avery Hayes has been accepted

Avery Hayes, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Padgriffin (Squawk) 16:37, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

ur so cool dan :P

such an amazing influence ! :D Alasteon (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Of course. Happy to be of help. mftp dan ^oops 23:23, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Carlos Händel

Hi Dan,

Just an FYI that MakaylaHippo1998 vandalized the Carlos Händel page a few days ago by removing all the previously restored edits you had deemed necessary. ~2026-16925-92 (talk) 16:36, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

You're block evading again. mftp dan ^oops 19:48, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Bleed American scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that Bleed American has been scheduled as today's featured article for 24 July 2026. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 2026, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/July 2026. Please keep an eye on that page, as notifications of copy edits to or queries about the draft blurb may be posted there. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks, and congratulations on your work! Z1720 (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Much better choice to run this three years later. I am very excited for this one. I appreciate it. Still, I'm surprised I was never notified. mftp dan ^oops 18:13, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

FAC Review Request

Hey there! I sent Alone (The Cure song) to FAC a few weeks back, and I was wondering if you would perhaps be interested in contributing a review? The song might be right up your alley (judging by the fact you list gothic rock as one of your genres of interest), and the more the merrier when it comes to FACs. No pressure, of course; I just figured that there's no harm in asking. Leafy46 (talk) 01:53, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

"Gothic rock" as an area of interest is just covering my bases because some I like is gothic, but it's certainly in the minority. Luckily for you, @Leafy46:, the Cure might be my favorites among that genre. I'll have to admit I haven't heard this one. I should go play it and then see about maybe reviewing this. mftp dan ^oops 01:56, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the consideration :) And I hope you enjoy the song, even if you don't wind up wanting to take on a review. Leafy46 (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@Leafy46: sorry, friend, but after reading over the review, I'm not sure there's much more I can contribute that hasn't already been said. I have some thoughts on the end of background, thinking it maybe a little too abstract (I know Robert doesn't give you a lot to work with but I think it can be done), but I'll get back to you no later than about nine hours from now, once I'm home from work. Maybe earlier if I get some downtime. That's about it though. I'll put those in the FAC and if they're satisfied I'll give an unopposed vote, but I don't know if I feel comfy with giving a support on finding so little to comment on. It's very good work, generally. mftp dan ^oops 12:43, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you again for your time, and I'll see what I can do regarding the background section to spruce it up a little bit :) Leafy46 (talk) 19:51, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I've done my best to flesh out and refine that section to be a bit less abstract, per your suggestion here. I welcome any other suggestions you have at improving the article, and greatly appreciate an unopposed vote if you find what I've done to the wording to be satisfactory :) Leafy46 (talk) 03:56, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Genre sourcing

I'm trying to keep in mind some of your edit summaries towards me earlier in the year, (I'm reading them and soaking them in, even though I don't reply). So if a band/artist/album/song is included in a listicle focused on a certain genre, does the specific media have to be specifically worded and labeled as such in-text for it to be used as a source for a genre inclusion/change in their Wikipedia article? I'm wondering if this article is a suitable source for designating Soccer Mommy as emo. Thanks in advance. I'm pretty sure the article is already being used as a source in the soccer mommy article. We can just take it out if it doesn't meet project policy. Cheers. Lofi Gurl (talk) 05:03, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey Lofi Gurl, thanks for reaching out! I appreciate the care you're taking to learn from feedback, and am happy to help. The short answer to your question is yes, they do require in-source specifics. Longer details, titles aren't reliable sources. The source is not outright unreliable or reliable just because of its title either (well, obviously, it's Alt Press ). WP:HEADLINE is pretty clearly-cut and gives you guidance on this matter that I like to spread the word on. There's nothing specifically tying emo to Soccer Mommy in-text for this source that HEADLINE requires, so this would be a policy violation. It was, in fact, in use in the band's article attributing emo improperly, and I went and boldly removed it. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. That source also sources indie rock, which is usable and appears in text. mftp dan ^oops 12:58, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

help w/ reception consensus

Hi again, hope yr well, got a very small question about how I should go about the critical reception consensus of Nymphs, which im working on atm (it's a mess). I have found three sources describing how the album was received (LA Times: "received some critical acclaim" / Larkin: "released [...] to a fanfare of critical praise" / Kerrang!: "great critical acclaim"), but I'm not sure whether 1. there would be WP:SYNTH at any point and 2. it accurately shows the critical consensus: Most of the contemporary reviews/scores I found are positive, though their are a few unfavourable/negative ones too, and even positive reviews do have some criticism. that being said, retrospective reviews appear to be unanimously positive. Thanks, // Chchcheckit (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Wow, I've never heard of Nymphs, but that's one hell of a collection of genres, Adeline. You once again have me intrigued, and I'll have to listen to this soon. Anyways, these three sources put together simply stating there was "critical acclaim" isn't contentious, nor synthesis if worded in careful wikivoice. You could say something along the lines of "not every publication received Nymphs well. Metal Forces [...]" and so on. mftp dan ^oops 16:12, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

That was already the plan; I do have a section for that. Thanks again! // Chchcheckit (talk) 17:05, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Absolutely. It's good to see you improving areas of music-i-pedia that continue to make me notice underappreciated artists. mftp dan ^oops 22:02, 1 July 2026 (UTC)