User talk:AntiDionysius/Archives/2023/November
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:AntiDionysius. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Love LP, "Da Capo"
Greetings, AntiDionysius --
I did edit the text regarding the song "!Que Vida!". I removed the sentence, "Critic Matthew Greenwald compares the bossa nova rhythm to the contemporary work of Antônio Carlos Jobim.", because Greenwald is incorrect: the rhythm (drumming pattern) is not a bossa nova rhythm. The rhythm actually has little in common with "bossa nova". One listen to Antonio Carlos Jobim's 1964 American debut LP, "The Composer of Desafinado Plays", should make this aurally clear to any objective listener.
Thank you. 2600:1700:7800:2A30:1DF5:ED54:3E1C:5C26 (talk) 18:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- We don't do original research here on Wikipedia. We report what sources say, and the source said what it said; your personal analysis that the source is incorrect is, unfortunately, not something we can take into consideration. If you would like to find some other reliable sources which back up what you're saying, that would be great. AntiDionysius (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Anti-Dionysius --
- Why is a music critic's published content taken at face value as correct? Artistic criticism is by its virtue a subjective endeavour. The critic's opinions of what's likable and what isn't aside, when a critic is harnessing fact based content it is surely up for challenge. Again, the drumming pattern is not a bossa nova -- I offered the Jobim LP as evidence -- if that's not good enough for you what else can I add? The ride cymbal pattern is incorrect (including the use of an open ride); cymbal crashes were NEVER used in authentic '60s bossa nova drumming patterns -- as is also the case for tom-tom fills. (Any percussionist who studies Brazilian music knows this to be so.)
- In any event, this appears to be a Wikipedia problem: a given music critic can have his/her errors protected "by default" as it were; yet, a commoner with objective evidence is cancelled. 2600:1700:7800:2A30:B5B2:D041:F7C6:A5C9 (talk) 02:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- A music critic is not assumed to be correct in their criticism per se, but the fact of them making the criticism is notable, and may merit inclusion in the article.
- You seem to be confused about the purpose of this site: Wikipedia is a collation and summary of what reliable sources say. It's not a place for random users to give their interpretation of things. It's user-written, but the facts within are never user-generated.
- You're not being "cancelled" - since you'll note you're still free to edit Wikipedia, no one has banned you or is asking for you to be banned. You also don't have "objective evidence". The objective content is the sound of the music itself; your assertion that that sound constitutes or does not constitute a given style is based on your own analysis, which I'm afraid does not have a place on Wikipedia. AntiDionysius (talk) 13:49, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Cleveland Browns relocation controversy
Hi. Regarding the edit I made to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Browns_relocation_controversy that you reverted: I was fixing a clear typo in a year. It says the Bobcats/Hornets resumed play in 2014 when it was 2004. The rest of that section of the article didn't have sources (but did mention the correct 2004 year) so I didn't think I needed to add my own sources. Thank you. 73.188.60.90 (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
RE: recently removed content from Annie Duke without adequate explanation
Hello, I've made an edit to the article to modify the presentation of the subject's religious background information, originally sourced from an interview with her father. There are multiple reasons for this edit: Verifiability: The source, being an interview with a family member, may raise concerns about bias and reliability. Relevance: The subject's religious background is not a defining aspect of her notability, and, as such, its inclusion may be considered unnecessary. Neutral Point of View (NPOV): The statement that she was not raised Jewish was presented in the negative, which is not typically included in biographical articles. Relevance to Notability: Importantly, it's worth noting that her father's religious beliefs and her mother's religious beliefs are not relevant to her notability. This edit is in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines and aims to maintain a neutral and encyclopedic tone in the article. I welcome any discussion or feedback on this edit to ensure that the article continues to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you. 98.60.23.170 (talk) 15:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
The Completionist
Hey, AntiDionysius, I had intended to edit the page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Completionist to reword the last statement since the original did not close out the topic. The original "However, most of these games Khalil preserved were already preserved on illegal ROM websites." did not seemed to be relevant to the end of the paragraph, if you have an editing suggestion that would be much appreciated. 98.157.248.38 (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
"Obama appoints French Economist Funded by Saudi Billionaire" by John Gapper @ Financial Times
"Obama appoints French Socialist Funded by Saudi Billionaire" by John Gapper at Financial Times and Gary P. Jackson at Word Press. SpsproductionsTwo (talk) 00:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- As I said at your talk page, I would advise you to use the Sandbox to practice editing, as currently many of your edits are not coherent. You can find more resources on editing at WP:WELCOME. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
The edit on stealth
Do YouTube videos count as a citation? Because I don’t know where I could find a citation of Stealths launch announcement 146.90.135.142 (talk) 14:04, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Generally speaking, no.
- Frankly I don't think it is necessary in either case for all the sounds to be included in the article. In plot summaries of books/movies/TV shows, dialogue is almost never included. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
My article was nominated for speedy deletion
Hi, I saw that you marked a draft article I'm working on (Draft:Call Me Kevin) for speedy deletion. It was marked for being blatant promotion, which was not my intent but after looking over it I found some sections that could be read that way and I revised them. I would also like to note that what currently exists is a rough draft of the article, and revisions will be made before it is published. I elaborated somewhat on these points in the talk page of the article. I'm writing this to ask if you could either remove the request, or tell me what I can do to revise it to meet encyclopedic standards if it doesn't yet. Chagrif (talk) 01:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
73.27.191.165's contributions
You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:LilianaUwU § 73.27.191.165's contributions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:16, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! AntiDionysius (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Removal of edit on Chinese actor Cheng yi
Baidu is basically considered as the Wikipedia of China. Every information usually under that source is accepted everywhere. The links I’ve taken are from the baidu encyclopaedia where they themselves have cited sources.🙏🏻 Please do consider my reasoning as there’s very little information about the actor in Wikipedia. ~@kskrisna222005 Ks.3022 (talk) 22:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's not my decision that it's an unreliable source. It's a matter of Wikipedia policy. Calling it the "Wikipedia of China" is also not a very good justification, because you're not allowed to cite Wikipedia or Wikipedia-like sites on Wikipedia.
- Additionally, as I mentioned, the sourcing was not the sole issue; the text you added was also written more from a fan perspective than an encyclopaedic one. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- Well, it was my first time editing something.. will keep everything in mind next time Ks.3022 (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- For sure, it's a learning process. If you need some tips, there are various resources here: WP:WELCOME AntiDionysius (talk) 23:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- Well, it was my first time editing something.. will keep everything in mind next time Ks.3022 (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Can you not accuse me of edit warring while refusing to participate in discussion?
I have provided more than adequate reasoning for my reverting of the content on Horst Wessel in at Talk:Horst Wessel, which is backed up by Wikipedia's guidelines. Please do not leave edit warring notices on my page while you both refuse to participate in further discussion, and have participated in disruptive editing by reverting the page back to version which both never had consensus and fails to follow Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you. 47.219.237.179 (talk) 19:47, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- You'll notice I haven't been reverting the page back, because I don't want to engage in edit warring, and I have participated in the discussion. Objectively, you are engaged in edit warring, as you continue to revert the page. "I have provided more than adequate reasoning for my reverting" is not an excuse; if you read the edit warring notice posted to your talk page, you'll notice that believing yourself to have a good reason for repeatedly reverting others edits does not stop those reverts constituting edit warring. AntiDionysius (talk) 19:50, 14 November 2023 (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!
47.219.237.179 (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Signs Of Anti-Info behavior
You have failed to read the summary on Lemon (color) that I put on my edit and as a result could lead into serval arguments on that page. Are you happy? 😐 74.104.186.219 (talk) 18:14, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- I read the edit summary. AntiDionysius (talk) 18:15, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Why revert changes on St. Joseph Higher Secondary School?
Hey! The link I gave on the chanchal Chowdhury specifically says hes from uday pur school. How is it unsourced? Let me reshare the link: https://insiderion.com/chanchal-chowdhury How much info do you require? Nasah 07 (talk) 20:25, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
A Dobos torte for you!
.jpg)
|
7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:35, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Ahh thank you! AntiDionysius (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Kirsty Hawshaw - Date of Birth
Source of Kirsty Hawkshaw birthday -
Also, Kirsty Hawkshaw Twitter account:
https://twitter.com/kirsty_hawkshaw/status/1724245301186244779 Merklynn (talk) 13:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- The first link doesn't work; the latter doesn't say what her birthday is. Anyway, the proper place for sources in in articles, alongside the information they're supporting. There's no need to post them here. AntiDionysius (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
That is promotional train wreck. I've culled the worst of the fluff, but the entire article needs a rewrite. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- I agree, but you've made a huge difference already; thanks for taking the time to cut it down! AntiDionysius (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)