User talk:GreenerGrass1

June 2022

Hello. Your recent edit to Ascension Catholic High School appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Meters (talk) 21:09, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Serena Scott Thomas. Thank you. Meters (talk) 21:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And please read WP:MINOR. Meters (talk) 21:16, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what your personal vendetta seems to be against the person in question, but you couldn't be more incorrect.

All of the information that has been added is correct and sourced. GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:18, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

please explain to me how adding her current husband is controversial....they're literally married. GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:18, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then provide a reliable source. It is a BLP violation because you are adding an unsourced claim of a marriage. Meters (talk) 21:23, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the vast majority of marriages on the site are not sourced, that doesn't make them less true and it certainly isn't defamation. GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And I have no vendetta against the person. He is apparently not notable, and his article was deleted, thus he should not be included in lists of notable people. After I saw the edit to the school article I checked your other edits and saw that you had also added him to another article, and made the unsourced claim of his marriage. Meters (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

oh so he DID have an article previously, meaning he is notable. Good to know. GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And while it was deleted for being blatantly promotional, there were concerns raised about his notability (or lack thereof) as well. —C.Fred (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since I haven't seen the page, I wouldn't know what it contained that was promotional previously, but based on the standard notability guidelines, I would assume a multiple time (award winning according to this very site) author, who has also produced several documentaries, would more than meet the notability guidelines for the site. GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:43, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Serena Scott Thomas. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:20, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not controversial and it's not a violation of any policy. If the page is inaccurate, shouldn't we be using the most accurate information? GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:23, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:V is a non-negotiable policy. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:24, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As you're already aware, most marriages on the site are not sourced, I simply added an additional line to add the accurate information.

Looking at your edit history, you seem to have a personal vendetta against the person that was added as her husband and have removed several references to him across several articles in the past....let's try to be civil and accurate in our edits and not let our personal politics get in the way....shall we? GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:31, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I literally have no clue who either of them are, nor do I care, but you should be careful to accuse other people of such nonsense or you'll find yourself blocked for personal attacks. Your lack of understanding of policy isn't the problem of anyone but yourself. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, because you seem to be removing the name from anywhere it pops up on the site....including your edit on the Donaldsonville LA page with the note "nope". GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty adorable that you totally misunderstand how Wikipedia works, I suggest you drop it because you're quickly headed toward a block. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty adorable that you assume I don't understand how the site works and that I can see your edit history. GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you do understand that people must be notable to be listed in lists of famous residents, famous alumni, etc? And that the barometer of notability for those purposes is having an article? —C.Fred (talk) 21:44, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was added to the list in the same way other people were added to the list. If you remove all of them in your edits, that's fine, but let's play by the same rules for everyone, yeah? GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The last time he was removed, so were three other redlinks. —C.Fred (talk) 21:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You mean today? Because the last time he was removed, he apparently had a page on the site :) GreenerGrass1 (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Article was deleted in 2019. —C.Fred (talk) 23:23, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]