User talk:Doniago/Archive 54
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Doniago. 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. |
| Archive 50 | ← | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | → | Archive 60 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:2016 Stanley Cup Finals
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 Stanley Cup Finals. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Kobayashi Maru
Hello - I probably didn't footnote or annotate sufficiently. The paragraph I put in the header about possible potential repercussions wasn't original research - it was a summary of the possible outcomes detailed elsewhere in the article. I restored my paragraph and reworded slightly to make it clear that it was a summary. Please let me know if you have any objection. Dkendr (talk) 16:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
- I'm a bit concerned about how this is handled, especially as the novels and videogames aren't canon ("official"), and as written the paragraph combines information from different sources without making it clear what originated where. I think it may be worth initiating a conversation about this at the article's Talk page and possibly asking folks from relevant projects to chime in, though I'll leave it alone for now.
- Citing the specific works that raise each of the consequences would, in my estimation, be a significant improvement. DonIago (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Frank Auerbach
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Frank Auerbach. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Clash of users
Doniago, there is a situation with a clash of users. There's an IP user 69.118.146.138 who has been commiting disruptive editing on 2015–16 United States network television schedule and 2016–17 United States network television schedule, adding shows that are not officially canceled by prime time networks yet and it keeps adding them. Several users, including AdamDeanHall, have been reverted his/her edits and this user keeps on doing it. There's a user name Toddst1, who has defended 69.118.146.138 on the WP:Administrator intervention against vandalism saying it's not vandalism, which the IP edits are very much disruptive editing at best. Toddst1 has kept on defending the IP user against AdamDeanHall and myself, when we are actually trying to resolve this. I mean AdamDeanHall maybe at times disruptive, but the IP user 69.118.146.138 is also being disruptive, maybe more so and Toddst1 is still defending that IP user. That's what you should deal with this civility issue between those users. BattleshipMan (talk) 17:10, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure why you came to me about this. I would recommend following the dispute resolution process. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Swingle Singers
Hello there! I received your message that a change that I made to a Swingle Singers article has been removed due to lack of citation. To be honest with you, I do recall making a change, but can't remember exactly what it was. I can't seem to find it in your archives. Can you help me, please? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.180.163.64 (talk) 03:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
- Here you go. Happy editing! DonIago (talk) 05:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Now Look!!!
The Harry Potter films (wich i must admit i love, Goblet of fire is my favourite, whats yours?) are some of the finest "BRITISH" films we have ever had. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.157.96.99 (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- When there are notes in an article providing guidance on how matters should be handled, the proper course of action is to do what they say or initiate a discussion at the article's Talk page, not simply ignore them. DonIago (talk) 20:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
>
- For gods sake im NOT IGNORING YOU!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.157.96.99 (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- Well you certainly didn't stop removing sourced content and start discussing your edits at the appropriate Talk pages, but we can discuss this further when you're unblocked. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 20:45, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Restoring poorly sourced information in BLP's
Please don't restore poorly sourced information in BLP's again as you did here. IMDB is not appropriate for any potentially contentious material in a BLP. And the second source appears to be a poorly-written blog. We must be very careful when writing about (or restoring content about) living people - ESPECIALLY negative or contentious content. SQLQuery me! 01:50, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- I'm aware of the issues with IMDb but thought the other source appeared reliable, and the information was being removed without any clear rationale being provided. In any case, I won't contest it at this point. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 06:19, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:To Pimp a Butterfly
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:To Pimp a Butterfly. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Ritchie Valens Edit
Reliable source? It's already been listed on the page that he went by the name Arvee Allens for his Fast Freight single. -Disco dude rock (talk) 18:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
- It wasn't sourced there and I had tagged it for needing to be sourced, but I see you've added a source in the infobox and have consequently de-tagged. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Not sure if this works but the quote is in there
http://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?f=430&t=21298
--MXfurry (talk) 22:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
- I doubt it would work as a reliable source, but there's also a problem with it not being clear who's saying what at that point in the transcript. I'm also concerned that this may have been intended as a one-off joke (such as Quagmire's alleged age in one episode) rather than something that was meant to be a significant character development. Perhaps raise the question at the article's Talk page? DonIago (talk) 04:35, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Frère Jacques
Dear Doniago, I reply to your remark on my editing Frere Jacques. This is not original research: I have a reference on the book from which this information is taken. Pym. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pym1507 (talk • contribs)
- @Pym1507: please make that more clear in your addition then. You included a Wikipedia link in your addition, which is not permitted per WP:CIRCULAR, and added other information that was not clearly cited. Thank you for your understanding. DonIago (talk) 13:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Doniago: I added a French Wikipedia link only for the exact meaning of a French word, of which I don't know the English equivalent. To confirm what I wrote I added a reference on an English book, even with page number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.206.146 (talk) 16:25, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- You're welcome to provide a citation to a source other than Wikipedia, but Wikipedia should absolutely not, ever, be used for citation purposes, as the underlying linked articles can change at any time. DonIago (talk) 16:47, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Charlie Hunnam
Hi I noticed that you reverted my edit on Charlie Hunnam's page about his long-time girlfriend/partner Morgana McNelis, if I'm correct, a celebrity involved in any sort of romantic relationship with someone whether they're married or not, are allowed to be included and mentioned on their page too right? So my inclusion of Morgana McNelis on Charlie Hunnam's page should be warranted. I didn't mean to get into a edit-war with 91.97.63.23, and I have actually left a message/warning on that user's page about this, but the user did not reply back to me, so I don't know whether the user did not read my message or he/she is just ignoring me. I do want to resolve this issue with the user civilly, but it's hard when the other user doesn't even reply. So I hope you can resolve this and restore my edit that includes the information about Charlie Hunnam's long-time girlfriend/partner, I think it's important to mention his partner on his page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.128.157 (talk) 05:30, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for reaching out to me. My feeling is that, at this time, there's no consensus to include the information, and I'm not sure what policy is regarding the inclusion of arguably non-significant romantic relationships (they're not married, for instance). I am glad to see that you initiated a discussion at the article's Talk page, though you really should have done that sooner. Better late than never, though. I would recommend that you review the appropriate policies (possibly under WP:BLP) and enhance your argument at the Talk page by providing any pertinent links you can find. Until then, I'm not entirely comfortable weighing in on either side of this dispute.
- A couple of housekeeping items: 1) please note that new Talk page items should generally be placed at the bottom of a Talk page (I've taken the liberty of moving this one), 2) while not strictly a requirement, it's considered good form to sign your posts, which you can do by adding four tildes (~) at the end of them. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 12:50, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi thanks for replying to me. I have seen pages for many other celebrities that contain information about all their romantic relationships, both married and not married, which led me to believe that non-marriage lovers and partners are also allowed to be mentioned on wiki pages. A few of the other celebrities pages that I found that includes all their romantic relationships information are Reese Witherspoon, Goldie Hawn, Ryan Phillippe, Tom Cruise, among many others. I find it incomprehensible and ridiculous if this sort of information is allowed on certain celebrities' pages but not on others. In my edit of Charlie Hunnam's page I also included a source reference to a reliable news article that clearly stated his long-time relationship with his partner. With all that, I fail to see anything wrong with including Charlie's long-time partner on his page, I think this is an important piece of info that should be mentioned on his page, especially since he has been in this particular romantic relationship with Morgana McNelis for about 10 years, I think that should be noted on his page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.128.157 (talk) 13:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
- I understand where you're coming from here, but, as discussed at WP:OTHERSTUFF, what you may really be establishing is that those articles themselves should be revised to remove the relationships discussed there. Again, it would probably be better to discuss this at the article's Talk page, where other invested editors can weigh in as well. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 13:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
- I read WP:OTHERSTUFF and it does not specifically state that non-marriage relationships should be avoided on wikipedia, if the information is proven by reliable sources, then I see no problems adding this information on Charlie's page, especially since his relationship with Morgana McNelis is so significant (dating for more than 10 years), and many other celebrities also have this kind of information mentioned on their pages. I have already posted a message regarding this issue on Charlie's talk page, but it was a direct message to 91.97.63.23 specifically (which the other user did not reply either), I will also initiate a discussion about this on his talk page so that other users can weigh in with their opinions on this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.128.157 (talk) 04:47, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
- I understand where you're coming from here, but, as discussed at WP:OTHERSTUFF, what you may really be establishing is that those articles themselves should be revised to remove the relationships discussed there. Again, it would probably be better to discuss this at the article's Talk page, where other invested editors can weigh in as well. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 13:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi thanks for replying to me. I have seen pages for many other celebrities that contain information about all their romantic relationships, both married and not married, which led me to believe that non-marriage lovers and partners are also allowed to be mentioned on wiki pages. A few of the other celebrities pages that I found that includes all their romantic relationships information are Reese Witherspoon, Goldie Hawn, Ryan Phillippe, Tom Cruise, among many others. I find it incomprehensible and ridiculous if this sort of information is allowed on certain celebrities' pages but not on others. In my edit of Charlie Hunnam's page I also included a source reference to a reliable news article that clearly stated his long-time relationship with his partner. With all that, I fail to see anything wrong with including Charlie's long-time partner on his page, I think this is an important piece of info that should be mentioned on his page, especially since he has been in this particular romantic relationship with Morgana McNelis for about 10 years, I think that should be noted on his page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.128.157 (talk) 13:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Oak Bluffs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/19/AR2009081904045.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardBond (talk • contribs)
- You're welcome to add that as a citation. DonIago (talk) 14:59, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Have you noticed the article I posted to your talk page regarding Oak Bluffs
??? RichardBond (talk) 08:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I replied right up above, so not sure what you're talking about, sorry. DonIago (talk) 12:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Undid revision
I undid your edit on Don Jon and cited a reference. --TheLennyGriffinFan1994 (talk) 02:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- You need to source the second part of the info you added, but I've tagged it rather than reverting. DonIago (talk) 04:39, 18 May 2016 (UTC)