User talk:Jovian Eclipse

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Jovian Eclipse! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions, including your edits to List of awards and nominations received by Imelda Staunton. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! ——Serial 14:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Serial for your warm welcome! Indeed, it has been an extremely delightful experience working on my first Wikipedia article and your guidance is much appreciated. Staunton has been a long-time favourite of mine and with the recent casting announcement of her taking over the role of Queen Elizabeth II in Netflix's The Crown, I wondered if there might be a renewed public interest in her previous work and therefore, decided to contribute so that people visiting Wikipedia aren't disappointed with insufficient information. I admit that I have primarily modelled the page after existing recently FL promoted ones like List of awards and nominations received by Scarlett Johansson, List of accolades received by Charlize Theron and List of awards and nominations received by Natalie Portman. Eager to work on more. Jovian Eclipse (talk) 16:02, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of List of awards and nominations received by Joan Allen

Congratulations, Jovian Eclipse! The list you nominated, List of awards and nominations received by Joan Allen, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion Collection releases

I'm largely baffled by the arcane and red-taped steps described in the 'undelete' and appeals segments, but from what I could glean I am supposed to reach out to you about List of Criterion Collection releases being restored. It also appears that it can be restored to me in draft form rather than fully restored to the website, should there be disagreement over notability. Not sure if I need to make the case for notability here - and the baffling levels of misunderstanding or misreading in the (too-late-noticed) deletion review suggest that it may be brickwallbanging to try - but just in case: The Criterion Collection is a noteworthy and lauded curated series of movies that have intrinsic and extrinsic worth first because of their existence, second because of their impact and third because of their inclusion alongside their peers in the CC. Thus, the 'List of releases' serves the same over-arching connotating of notability as does a list of Presidents or World Cup Winners; each is already notable, but the grouping is also notable because of the interactions and juxtapositions. It also serves as a valuable resource in the history of (world) cinema for students to see at a glance which films (directors, years, formats) are deemed of sufficient note to be included. The major argument levelled against notability was the sourcing of releases to the company's website; absent sourcing to a plethora of places talking about DVDTBlu releases, that is necessarily the best source. Indeed, the existence of the discs and their corresponding spine numbers is hardly debatable nor in need of rigorous sourcing.. the List is not for reviews nor commentary, merely a static list of notable releases of notable films. It is baffling that a repository of information and knowledge should seek to remove same. Bizarre that anyone would claim this list is merely a catalog(ue) or shopping list (indeed, that is one function of repositories of knowledge - to allow interested parties to discover specific items). Please restore it generally, restore it to me to work on, forward me to the correct form, etc. Thank you. ntnon (talk) 18:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ntnon: Whoa, that's a lot of text to wade through. All I can say is that the page was deleted by a community consensus decision and I don't think I single-handedly have the power to restore it. Thanks! _Jovian ^Eclipse 14:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you restore it *to me* (to a sandbox space?) to work on? The purported consensus was about four people, not significantly long after a similar consensus of considerably more people had it saved.

@Ntnon: I am afraid I do not have what you want. Maybe you can try contacting the admin who deleted the page. And Wikipedia is not just a game of numbers. Consensus shifts over time, sometimes sooner than expected. The relevant Wikiprojects and all the major contributors of the page had been notified. If only few of them presented their objections, it most likely means the majority did not have any. It does not matter even if a single person had supported the deletion—with no oppose votes from other users, the result would have been the same. _Jovian ^Eclipse 14:23, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would also add that one of the original major contributing editors of that article had actually supported its deletion. _Jovian ^Eclipse 14:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The allegation was that, as it was largely sourced to the CC website, that did not prove the importance of the page. Which is farcical logic, but fixable. ntnon (talk) 21:26, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ntnon: You are free to fix the problems in your user space and then submit the draft to AfC. _Jovian ^Eclipse 14:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]