User talk:ScarletViolet

Status: Busy

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, linking to me ({{Ping|ScarletViolet}}), so that I will be notified.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, linking to your username, so that you will be notified.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

This is ScarletViolet's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

ScarletViolet is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives

Welcome to my talk page!

Hello! Please leave a new message. I will respond to your message as soon as possible. Thanks and happy editing!

Also take care of the following points:

If I left you a message; please answer on your talk page, using {{ping|Username}}, {{reply to|Username}} or {{u|Username}} in your response, or add {{talkback|Username}} or {{whisperback|Username}} to my talk page. And if you leave me a message; I will answer on my talk page, using {{ping|Username}} or {{u|Username}} in my response, or add {{talkback|Username}} or {{whisperback|Username}} to your talk page.
Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page or at the bottom of the respective section, and use a new ==Descriptive heading== for new topics.
Indent your comment when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ":"
Sign and date your entry by inserting four tildes "~~~~" at the end of your message.
I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.
Avoid personal attacks, do not troll or use this page as a chat room.
Please, always assume good faith.
If the topic is something personal, please email me and leave {{ygm}} on my talk page.
And if you are impressed by my contributions, consider giving WikiLove.

⇒Start a new topic⇐

Message me if:

You want to talk to me
You need help on Wikipedia
You are concerned about an article on Wikipedia
You have a question regarding Wikipedia's policies and guidelines

DON'T message me if:

You are going to be rude
You are going to use profanity or curse words (heck is fine)
You are going to troll, spam or start drama
You are going to ask for personal information
You want to force me to do work you can easily do yourself

November 11, 2024

Philippine Standard Time (refresh)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ScarletViolet! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

-- 00:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sarah Geronimo

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sarah Geronimo you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Spookyaki -- Spookyaki (talk) 05:43, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spookyaki: Okay. Good luck on your review. ScarletViolet t c 13:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Sarah Geronimo

The article Sarah Geronimo you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Sarah Geronimo for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Spookyaki -- Spookyaki (talk) 00:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Renom to GA, or straight to FA

Responding to your message on my talk page. I covered a lot of the major issues in the review itself, but here are the two biggest areas that I would focus on for improving the article:

Prose — There are some sections of the article where it's not entirely clear what is being said. For example, the sentence "Asilo described the album as Geronimo's bold reinvention and adaptability as a singer." It seems like the clause "adaptability as a singer" is supposed to be describing "the album," but an album cannot sing. I get a bit more granular on this in the review, but if you're having difficulty, I honestly wonder if putting in a request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests might help. Alternatively, you could add a copyedit template (Template:Copy edit). I also might be willing to do some copyediting myself, though I won't have a lot of time to devote to it in the next few weeks. I also think that would preclude me personally from re-reviewing the article; someone else would have to do it.
Alignment with sources — There are various points in the article where claims are made that do not align with the sources that are supposed to support them. Again, I get more granular in the review, but as an example, in the article you quote Jennifer Dunega as saying that "Geronimo’s vulnerability is adorable while her new-found fierceness is laugh-out-loud funny without being over-the-top, [and] it didn't distract from her appeal." This makes it seem like Dunega is saying that Geronimo's vulnerability does not detract from her appeal, but the actual quote is "Sarah Geronimo's vulnerability is adorable while her new-found fierceness is laugh-out-loud funny without being over-the-top. Though it is unclear and odd why she needs to wear a wig throughout the film, it doesn't distract from her appeal." It's evident from the full quote that the thing that doesn't distract from her appeal is the wig. In this case, the source has been misrepresented to draw a conclusion that isn't supported by the original author. There are other instances where claims are made that are contradicted or not even mentioned by the appended sources. For example, "in 2014, Geronimo starred in her next film Maybe This Time, which reunited her with Coco Martin" is contradicted by the source, which says that the film is their "maiden... collaboration." I would recommend going through each source and making sure that they actually say what the article says they do.

I didn't mention it in my review, but I think it's also possible that people might call into question the reliability of the article's sources, since most (basically all articles from PEP, Philstar, and ABS-CBN) are not written in WP:NPOV. I personally thought the way they were used was fine, since (a) there is no consensus about most of them at Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Sources and (b) the article itself is written in a neutral tone and non-neutral statements are generally attributed to their respective writers, but others might find fault with them.

Again, I get more granular in the review, but those are the biggest thing I would consider tackling. Good luck and thanks for your work! Let me know if you have any more questions. Spookyaki (talk) 01:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spookyaki: I hope this understood me well. Thank you! PS After this, I can either open up a peer review, second GAN nomination, or even straight to FAC since I believe it's already comprehensive. ScarletViolet t c 01:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! It doesn’t seem to me like comprehensiveness is a major issue in the article, no. Once the major issues are worked out I think that either a peer review or GAN resubmit would be reasonable. Spookyaki (talk) 02:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cc @Jdcooper, @ViperSnake151, @RandomMe98, @Ervin111899, @SheriffIsInTown, @Khairul hazim, @Tvfunhouse, @KjjjKjjj, @PJ Santos, @Hotwiki, @WayKurat, @Chaiten1, @CryingSulfur, @Fandi89, @Pratama26, @Raja Nine to Five 2001:448A:1020:5990:E9F4:CC65:92E:D6FC (talk) 16:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop tagging me in these random copy edit discussions. Speaking for myself (though I'm sure some of the others might agree). Just because I've copy edited some articles for Philippine television programs/networks does not mean I need to be pinged any time anybody on the project discusses one. You've already been warned by other editors, including administrators, to not do this. If you truly would like my assistance or input you are welcome to reach me on *my* talk page. Tvfunhouse (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ningning (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ningning (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 25 § Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Tick tock tick tock tick tock" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Tick tock tick tock tick tock has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 25 § Tick tock tick tock tick tock until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:08, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Teleserye" lead article issues

While I was doing the draft for Saving Grace, the IP user said that the upcoming series is not considered a teleserye, and removed the link the Philippine television drama. [1] I'm sure that series counts as a teleserye since it is set to be releasing on a streaming service, doesn't it? JRGuevarra (talk) 15:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]