Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:22, 18 February 2020

This is Mr. Vernon'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 Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 7 days

Notice regarding BLPs

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

Pls join ongoing RFC at Talk:Kirk Douglas#Request for comment current.--Moxy 🍁 04:42, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Done. I would like to know why Natalie Wood's alleged rape is being removed from Kirk Douglas' article, but Natalie Wood's alleged murder is not being removed from Robert Wagner's article. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 04:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:RS one has been investigated by major news organizations and involves legal proceedings..... the other is a Blog posting by an anonymous user as stated in the sources.--Moxy 🍁 04:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Here's a hug

I don't know you, but having read your user page, I would like to express: I'm sorry for your loss, and I hope that you have found your way back into the light. starship.paint (talk) 06:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 06:57, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Please be more careful

Please check before reverting, and WP:DENY recognition, thanks. 74.73.230.72 (talk) 06:56, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

"Sola Busca tarot" page

What is "unnecessary/inappropriate" about my linking to a full set of scans of this deck? 92.5.63.207 (talk) 03:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, it looked like a spam link at first. I've reverted it back. My apologies. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

God

How was my edit vandalism? It was in no way destructive to the article. IThoughtTheGlueWasMilk (talk) 03:17, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Kayne West? Come on. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 03:18, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Why would you notify?

Not that it really matters, but why would you notify the socks under these circumstances? I mean, if you think a potentially constructive contributor is being unfairly accused, or has acted out of confusion, that's one thing. But this was ... not like that. --JBL (talk) 23:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Joel B. Lewis It seemed like policy per ] section 5. Am I reading it incorrectly? It's all academic now since the case is over (and I agree they were obvious socks and destructive ones at that), but I thought we had to notify the accused regardless. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. If you read the top of that page, you'll see that it's marked "currently inactive and is retained for historical reference." The relevant active page is Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/SPI/Guide_to_filing_cases which says in relevant part You may notify the suspected accounts by adding {{subst:socksuspectnotice|PUPPETMASTER|sig=yes}} to the bottom of their talk pages. (Notification isn’t mandatory, and in some cases it may be sub-optimal. Use your best judgement.) All the best, JBL (talk) 23:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Joel B. Lewis Sorry, I see the action in question. Thanks. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 23:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

(I have cleaned up my previous edit so the quote works.) No problem, thanks. All the best, JBL (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

RE: February 2020

Hello there,

In regards to your message, all of my edits were simply adding greater detail to the movie's plot gathered through careful observation. I would like to know how to possibly cite "reliable sources" for such details.

47.156.30.190 (talk) 23:18, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

That falls under WP:ORIGINAL. You can read WP:SOURCES and the related articles for what a reliable source is. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 23:20, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

If noting down explicit details and dialogue in a movie is considered "original research", then something seems very off with that policy. Just my two cents though. 47.156.30.190 (talk) 23:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Korean drama

Hello, thank you for reverting the changes for Korean drama. As to the number of dramas displayed in the List of highest rated Korean dramas in public broadcast I guess 20 might be sufficient but 50 is great because these are historical numbers that are difficult to find elsewhere (such high ratings are not achievable nowadays) and they also include some dramas that were to some extent "life-changing" in Korea at the time, thus it is good to use this table to find dramas important in k-drama modern history. As to the number displayed in the List of highest rated Korean dramas in cable television - 20 is great but 5% threshold is even better because 5% is considered to be a high rating for cable TV (cable TV usually has lower ratings than public TV in Korea) and not that many dramas is able to achieve that rating per year. As a result this table is great to find new popular dramas and get up-to-date information about what the Korean (and often international) public likes. I know that recently the table is getting longer but I see it as important - maybe the ratings would need its own page to prevent recent repeated changes and reversals?TanizakiChoson (talk) 08:05, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

TanizakiChoson - Perhaps, but if editors are not getting consensus before making changes like this, you should feel free to revert the changes, and discuss it with the editor - just make sure you don't violate edit warring rules (specifically report them first if it gets that bad). --Mr. Vernon (talk) 16:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Your comment at Murder of Tessa Majors deletion discussion

You seem sensible, so I hope you'll agree that insinuations about Missing white woman syndrome come off as in very poor taste in an AfD discussion like the one above. I hope you'll consider striking your comment. Thanks. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)