Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:46, 18 May 2010

evilursa

I don't know who you think you are, but for you to keep taking out information regarding sctress Sarah Douglas is inappropriate. This is an encyclopedia site, and by listing current activities is NOT promotion, but making sure that it's facts are up-to-date. If a film that she's worked on is allowed to be mentioned on the site and is due to receive it's release date, then there's no issue regarding that. It would be the same to say that by announcing, for example, the release date of Kylie Minogue's new album, that would be promotion as well, so I certainly don't think it's your place to deem it as promotion and should you continue to keep removing said data, then I shall keep reinstating it and also report you to Misplaced Pages themselves. Making sure facts that are up to date is clearly the main issue and you're grossly overstepping the mark. Refrain from doing so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilursa (talk • contribs) 16:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you review WP:UNSOURCED and WP:VERIFY before trying to tell anyone what material is and isn't appropriate for inclusion. At no point did I suggest your goal was promotional, but if you want to assume that's what I think, go right ahead. Also, feel free to report me for removing unsourced material per WP guidelnes - it should be pretty entertaining. Tootles! Doniago (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Timmy Polo SP Investigation

Just so you don't do one too, I just submitted an investigation which can be found here . (Deftonesderrick 19:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC))

And now the fun begins. Doniago (talk) 20:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Re. "is that you, Timmy?" on Lethal Weapon 4 - yes, it was; blocked.

If you come across any more, please notify with a quick {{adminhelp}} note here? Thanks,  Chzz  ►  00:34, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Will do! Thanks for the notice! :)

Er...by "here" did you mean my Talk page (talk about convenient (grin)), or a location that's not clear to me? Doniago (talk) 17:36, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

{{adminhelp}} I do believe we may have another. User:Hanford_West just bloated Lethal Weapon 4 and is showing a remarkably similar editing style. Doniago (talk) 21:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done I reviewed it and agree that this is the same user, and have made the block. However, in the future, it's probably easier for everyone if you go to Sockpuppet Investigations and file a case there. Thanks! --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again,  Chzz  ►  22:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi there...I don't mean to sound think or anything, I just want to make sure I'm reading this correctly...going forward I should use SPI rather than adminhelp to report any additonal socks of this user? Is there a convenient way to report additional socks for someone who already has an SPI? Their original SPI was archived...I don't know whether that's a factor in the best approach to take. Thanks for the advice! Doniago (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Tag away

Okay, tell me where you think cites are needed? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

(smile) Helps if you include a link to the article... hold on a sec... Doniago (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The first two sections under Life & Career in particular contain statements that would seem to need sourcing...there are sources later on which are perhaps intended to apply to the unsourced statements, but if so, this isn't clear. I'd probably mark them for refimprove rather than doing any outright removal (unless I know an unsourced statement has -just- been added I don't like to remove it without giving people a chance to find sourcing) if the article was public and I stumbled across it. Doniago (talk) 16:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw the refimprove tag. Actually, I was looking for more targeted citation requests. Mind going through it again with cn tags instead? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:22, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I was hoping you wouldn't say that. :) I'll see what I can do later today. Doniago (talk) 16:25, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done Doniago (talk) 16:38, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. You really think people are going to challenge all that information? I get (and like) the idea about making an article bulletproof, but there's kevlar and then there's tank armor. Too many citations and the article becomes unwieldy, both visually and editorially. Thoughts? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Btw, working on placing those refs. Will let you know when I am done. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jack...the answer is...I don't know. -I- think those statements should be cited, but my opinion isn't consensus. You should bear in mind though that BLPs are usually held to a higher standard than standard articles, especially if the material could be considered controversial. If I hadn't seen your comment on Mil's talk page I likely never would have come across the article, myself, and if it's likely to receive low traffic than it's entirely possible that unsourced statements won't be challenged.

I think you're in a position where you can cite them yourself, leave them uncited and hope for the best (editors may or may not challenge the statements, but since it's a BLP statements are more likely to be removed without warning), or keep them in but keep the tags as well, at which point editors may at least be more likely to leave the statements intact. I'm probably also one of the most assertive people out there as far as unsourced material goes, so you may want to talk to other editors as well before taking any steps.

I hope my waffling helps! Doniago (talk) 18:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't be down on yourself, Doniago; it isn't waffling to explain your views on the subject. Everyone has the same instances where there are excpetions to most rules (its one of the many reasons we have IAR). Anyway, I've cited everything you tagged. Wanna have another look? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

"It's alive...ALIVE!"

Desiree Bassett is now in mainspace. Yay! - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

(laughs) I'll just go ahead and file an AFD then...kidding!!! Doniago (talk) 22:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Plot templates

Interesting new templates and the wording looks good to me. Just missing a mention that there is also a manual of style for anime and manga, Comics, and television articles as well :-) -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! I wasn't aware of the anime one...does it mention length specifically? I don't believe the comics or televison ones do, which is why I omitted those. If the anime/manga guidelines are specific, you're welcome to modify the template, or I'll get around to it myself (probably later today). I am having one issue where when I sign the template the signature gets dropped to a separate line rather than being integrated...not sure how to fix that just yet, though it's an easy clean-up. Doniago (talk) 13:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The television one gives specific word length for episode summaries. The anime MoS points out specific lengths for summaries in chapter lists, and points to TV for episode length guidelines. :-) -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi again...finally fixed the signature bug, whew! I've added the television link. I reviewed the anime/manga link that you sent, but I don't see anything specifically mentioning word-count, which was what the templates are specifically intended to address...possibly I overlooked the pertinent section? Thanks again for your help! Doniago (talk) 14:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Here ya go :-) Might be good to see if these can be added to Twinkle once you've finished testing -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 14:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done Anime/manga's added. I'll give it some time for feedback/revision before pursuing Twinkle, but thanks for the feedback and links! Doniago (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Table format

Hello. I was not aware of anything in MOS that discouraged that. I simply restored what seemed like an appropriate table that had been changed without explanation. I have no particular feelings about it one way or the other. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 14:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The Magician's Nephew

Hello there, think you got the wrong talk page, I haven't edited the plot summary of this article in recent history.Mesmacat (talk) 15:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi there...you did according to . Maybe it was unintentional? No big deal, anyway. Doniago (talk) 16:04, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Mobbing

I am extremely annoyed that you consider my hard work as "vandalism".

1. my edits are entirely constructive - I have added material and not deleted any material
2. the edits are supported by an authoritative cited source.
3. my cited source is the world's leading authority on mobbing Kenneth Westhues and it took him years to develop his list of films that feature mobbing.
4. I may have to report you to Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism to seek appropriate action against you for masking false and completely inappropriate accusations of vandalism.--Penbat (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)