User talk:InsiderChiari: Difference between revisions

Hi. I restored “electronic” in the Lady Gaga infobox because the article itself contains multiple sourced mentions of her involvement with electronic-based styles, including electronic rock, electronic dance music, avant-garde electronic dance music, techno-pop and electronic-based pop. These descriptions appear across different points in her career — for example on Born This Way, Artpop and Chromatica — and are already verified within the body of the article.
Since the purpose of the infobox is to summarize information that is clearly supported in the article, it is appropriate to keep electronic listed among her genres. Please avoid removing sourced content based on personal interpretation.
If you are genuinely interested in exploring how Gaga’s work intersects with electronic music in its various forms (such as EDM, synth-pop, industrial dance, etc.), you may find the following pieces informative:

Sharing these purely as optional reading, since they offer additional context on how her music has been approached by critics and the electronic music community.
Thanks. CHr0m4tiko0 (talk) 21:43, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point, but per WP:EXPLICITGENRE, genres should be attributed explicitly to the artist or work as a whole. Combining sources that describe Lady Gaga in the context of electronic music without undoubtedly applying that genre to her overall sound appears to be WP:SYNTH. InsiderChiari (talk) 16:06, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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) 02:05, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reminder. I do often forget/don’t feel bothered to leave an edit summary, but I will make an effort going forward to always leave an edit summary. The tool you suggested seems very helpful so I did turn it on. Thanks! InsiderChiari (talk) 16:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@InsiderChiari, you arent by any chance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/AndrewTheWikiEditor ? FMSky (talk) 08:51, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not. InsiderChiari (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Michael Jackson, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 00:01, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Um ok, it was literally a self revert.. it’s not that deep. InsiderChiari (talk) 03:08, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Binksternet “I spend a lot of time reverting vandals when I would rather be expanding articles.” Biggest lie of the century. Have fun! InsiderChiari (talk) 05:55, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]