User talk:Mushy Yank

Hello and welcome.

I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. So if you leave me a message here, I will reply here. I will not continue to watch a talk page if the discussion has migrated. By the same token, if I leave a comment on another talk page, please respond to it there. At the same time, feel free to send an alert about a comment you have left elsewhere. Also please note that I find user warning templates generally inappropriate. If I have made a mistake and there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.

Thank you.

Archived talk: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6.
Ratings[edit]
Should ratings be spelt out in numbers or words. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Numbers (it says words). DareshMohan (talk) 01:41, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Daresh  Mohan. I would use numbers (obviously for audience ratings; and even for XXX out of XXX stars). It's not indicated in MOSFILMS;  I've had a look at a couple of GA film articles and they all use some use numbers. Maybe drop a line on the TP of the Film Project, I am absolutely certain you will receive a detailed answer.Mushy Yank (talk) 10:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but the answers weren't that detailed, you can see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Reception_section_ratings_should_be_in_words. I've also informed RangersRus on his talk page but the amount of film articles with numbers for critical ratings are huge to say the least. DareshMohan (talk) 08:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, just try the Film project general talk.  But I think the MOS is quite clear when it mentions "Sport scores and vote tallies should be given as numerical figures" (I consider film ratings to be in that category); but allow me to ping @Butlerblog:; if they don't know the answer, maybe leave a note there. (Thanks, Butlerblog). Another think that can be done, as I can see a dispute mentioned on the Indian ITF TP, is leave a note on the MOS TP to ask for clarification and even changes in the wording of the section (adding "ratings" and even film/products ratings) to the page.  Best, Mushy Yank (talk) 16:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... If there's a specific MOS item on that for Film or TV, I'm not sure I'm aware of it. Even the TV MOS (which I more familiar with) doesn't specifically state an answer (I would expect it to be in MOS:TVRECEPTION).  But that being said, my inclination is that using numbers for ratings is standard practice.  ButlerBlog (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot!@Butlerblog: (I saw other examples of GA/FA using letters (after I wrote my message); but I'm not sure numbers (that I too use!) are not acceptable). BestMushy Yank (talk) 22:23, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: I may have misinformed you on your talk page. DareshMohan (talk) 00:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DareshMohan: Thank you for updating me. I'm glad this is clear now. RangersRus (talk) 00:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]Film articles with barely any sources[edit]
Ever since Indiaglitz was listed as unreliable (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Guidelines_on_sources) some of the film articles I created like Naanu Neenu Jodi and Nesi (film) don't have much sourcing. DareshMohan (talk) 12:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, DareshMohan, Yes, that's a bit of a worry (I see that 123telugu is listed there in red too....isn't that too much??) But the articles are sourced, and the films could meet other requirements for notability (e.g. Naanu Neenu Jodi might be considered notable because it is a noted role in the career of Vijay Raghavendra). If the new assessment of sources leads to a vast campaign of content removal and potential deletions then maybe the assessment is not correct! Or maybe the requirements for Indian films need to be adjusted per WP:BIAS. I would have thought the 3 listed websites to be at least worth of a case-by-case appraisal, but that's just me. Mushy Yank (talk) 12:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, "the requirements for Indian films need to be adjusted per WP:BIAS". And RangersRus must control his purging of such sources. Viggy cannot and should not be deleted from Kannada film articles since according to this, "Those days only Viggy.com and Chitraloka.com were online portals for Kannada films". Kailash29792 (talk)  13:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]