Talk:Indiggo

/Archive 1

/Translations

Cutremurat Source
' was erroneously aged when it was inserted in 2/26/2014. They were still in Romania in 2004. I suspect it is undated. I don't need it and it will confuse the FA review. Vyeh (talk) 15:15, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Informal peer review by Nolelover
From Nolelover:

Here are initial thoughts as I read:


 * Too much info in the first sentence. Possibly just end the sentence after "singing-songwriting duo" or if the musical is the one reason they're notable, keep that and put the "signed with Imagem" clause elsewhere.
 * Second graf of the lede feels very quote heavy and tbh, the Miller source in particular doesn't seem so unique/well-written that it needs to be quoted instead of paraphrased.
 * I think as a whole the lede follows MOS:LEADREL pretty well.
 * The Indiggo section could probably be trimmed a bit--if the parents have that much going on, some of the content that is less related to the twins should be in their own articles (assuming the notability question ofc).
 * Possibly restructure the Indiggo section so that the review comes at the end and the section opens with the background of the show itself (second graf), just so it flows a little better.
 * I can tell you haven't rewritten the Indiggo section as it definitely feels like anon editors have just added individual sentences over the years to it. This one probably needs the most work/trim/cleanup--I can imagine that sourcing here is lacking though. Is there anything you can add or did that 2011 album rumor come to nothing?
 * I made a quick change in the Indiggo. Possibly also shorten the quote from Sony BMG, since it's quite literally a press release? From "No wonder!" on to the end of the quote seems kinda fluff-y.

On the whole it seems pretty well structured and appropriate weight is given to the various aspects. I didn't have time to check sourcing but on the other hand, nothing stuck out as obviously needing a source. Unless you have a whole additional aspect of their career to write about (music?), it seems like you can tighten a couple of the sections, probably drop 100-150 words across the entire piece and have a really good article. Nolelover (talk) 15:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Previous bad-faith editing
An IP user and a registered editor used bad faith editing of Indiggo to attack Indiggo77, which had been used for years by Indiggo and their manager to edit the page.

Vyeh (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Background

 * Starting February 16, 2014, the IP account repeatedly edited Indiggo to change their description from "American" to "Romanian" and to claim that a book written by one of them was self-published.


 * The IP account also engaged in repeated messages on this talk page,  their talk page and even  their sandbox until they posted on February 20 at 1 am in New York City, where they  currently reside “STOP! STOP! STOP! You don't even have a real name! Get off this article or I'll call our lawyers!” responding to the sandbox post.


 * They were banned an hour and a half later on February 20 for making a legal threat.


 * Wikipedia says

"A legal threat, in this context, is a threat to engage in an external (real life) legal or other governmental process that would target other editors…. Rather than immediately blocking users who post apparent threats, administrators should first seek to clarify the user's intention if there is doubt. Blocking for legal threats is generally not such an urgent need that it must be done before determining whether an ambiguous statement was genuinely a threat of legal action."


 * Mosfetfaser pointed out “There is zero danger in that angry/hurt comment to the IP addie from the girls,” suggesting their statement is ambiguous.


 * “A legal threat is a statement by a party that it intends to take legal action on another party.” Legal action redirects to the article Complaint, which is a “formal legal document.”


 * There was no contact on Indiggo’s talk page to clarify whether their comment in the middle of the night was made from anger or hurt of the night or a  veiled or indirect threat. Even if there had been an email, an hour and a half in the middle of their night is "immediate," violating Wikipedia's stated policy.


 * Complicating matters, both the IP and named accounts participated in the discussion. The named account even said, “And this suspected duck continues to make disruptive edits to Indiggo despite multiple warnings.” However, the named account made some of the warnings.


 * Indiggo77 blanked their talk page (but not their sandbox), suggesting they were leaving Wikipedia before they were banned.


 * Wikipedia was used by two accounts to attack Indiggo. Following Wikipedia's definition of legal threat requires the conclusion that consulting legal counsel is a formal process and that Indiggo77 was targeting an anonymous user, which is absurd. Another interpretation is that Indiggo77 was at the end of their rope and looking for an end to the anonymous harassment. That is enough to suggest ambiguity and the failure of Wikipedia to follow its stated policy. Vyeh (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The page was nominated for deletion February 21, 2018. Claiming to have "removed all the unsourced, fake and self-promotional content, and rewritten some to accurately reflect the few reliable sources," the named editor said,

"[T]he page has been exploited by the twins to promote their publicity for 5 years(!) ... [L]ots of efforts have already been spent on making it less biased .... [K]eeping this article can prevent future recreation of the same article in promotional language by their suspected sock puppets .... [T]he Romanian wiki page on Indiggo exists and needless to say the page is flooded with all unsourced promos (the Romanian wikipedia standards are probably different than the English site here). Maintaining a neutral, unbiased and accurate article about the twins here in the English site is not a bad idea. ... [H]aving our accurate and unbiased English version for readers' reference to offset the Romanian biased version is better than having only the Romanian biased version. Although the twins are so unpopular, we can't exclude the possibility that a few readers genuinely need accurate information about them.""


 * The result was Delete. The deletion review on March 8 was no consensus. The page was renominated for deletion March 25. The result was Keep. Vyeh (talk) 03:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Actions of the IP editor

 * First Indiggo related activity on February 16 at 1:54: added to this talk page “  ,” a talk message box  stating "The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of the article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Indiggo77 (talk · contribs) / Indiggo Indiggo."


 * Second Indiggo related activity 14 minutes later: Remove 27% of the Indiggo with an edit summary of “deleted invalid sources.” However, the changes included the addition of “ ” and deletion of two “Bild” sources for Indiggo’s mother being a teacher of world literature, while three “Bild” sources were accepted for Indigo starting performance at the age of 12; being released by Sony, regularly appearing on German and European TV shows and receiving media support from “Bild;” and a quote by Dieter Bohlen. A broadwayworld.com cite, which was deleted.


 * Reverted Indiggo’s revisions on February 19 at 3:36, 3:37, 3:37 again, 3:37 yet again, 4:24, 5:46, 5:47, 5:57, 5:58, 6:05, 21:48, 21:49, 21:49 again, 21:50 and 21:50 again; and on February 20 at 1:49.


 * February 20, 2:06: added a link to America's_Got_Talent_(season_3), which contained ‘Indiggo … Half of the audience were booing at Indiggo and Morgan called them "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition." Eliminated’ and the cite “ .”


 * February 20, 2:09: added 'Judge Piers Morgan called Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition.” .' Note that the name of the reference is the same as in the preceding bullet.


 * February 20, 2:12 with the edit summary “edited for clarity:” added “and they were eliminated from the competition.”


 * February 20, 5:20 with the edit summary “reorganized and added source that says they're Romanian and America's Got Talent (reality TV) contestants: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/14/arts/music/jay-z-and-kanye-wests-watch-the-throne.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0:” created a subsection “America’s Got Talent” at the top of the page (below a one sentence lede and the TOC); moving the America’s Got Talent material from the middle of the article to the top (creating a quasi- attack page); and added “ .” The sole material in the NYT source on Indiggo is: "Furthermore, a close reading of the liner notes reveals gems: … a moving sample from the Indiggo Twins, “America’s Got Talent” punching bags and, as described here, “ambassadors of the great Romanian tradition” (which?)," a fictitious reference, supporting neither of the two clauses of the sentence: the quote or Indiggo’s elimination.


 * February 24, 10:03 with the edit summary “added two sources that I saw at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Indiggo, added and deleted categories:” added “  .” The sole material in the Today (“rowdy”) commentary on Indiggo is 'Then, Romanian twin sisters who went by the name of Indiggo did a heinous rendition of Frank Sinatra’s “New York, New York.” The judges acknowledged the singing was terrible, but must have been feeling charitable as they gave the twins a pass so they could have another chance to impress in Vegas,' another  fictitious reference, not supporting the crowd booing (see the second bullet of the named editor, below), the quote nor the elimination. In fact, it said Indiggo advanced. The sole material in The Huffington Post’s “The Blog” on Indiggo is “There were a few of the weirdos on hand for which this show is known, including … a set of aggressively talentless twins from Romania who refer to themselves as Indiggo and positively murdered New York, New York. (They were so fantastically terrible and so relentless in their self-promotion that Piers and Sharon voted them through to the Las Vegas semi-finals.)” — a third  fictitious reference, not supporting the crowd booing, Piers Morgan’s quote on them being the worst singers and dancers in the competition nor the elimination. In fact, it said two of the three judges, Piers and Sharon, voted to advance them.

Vyeh (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Actions of the named editor

 * Reverted Indiggo77’s revisions on February 20 at 5:45 (first Indiggo related activity).
 * February 21, 21:10 with edit summary “Removal of unsourced/fake/self-promotional content, rewriting some to accurately reflect the few, near non existent sources. Sinking sections. Check talk page consensus:” added “The audience were booing at Indiggo and .“ At this time, there were only two cites, the New York Times source discussed in the seventh bullet of the IP editor’s actions above, and the 14th episode of Season 3 of America’s Got Talent, a primary source that has not been issued as a DVD and was most likely not available 5 and a half years after its initial airing. The New York Times source does not mention the audience booing. America's Got Talent (season 3), which cites the same episode, says “Half of the audience were booing at Indiggo and,“ showing the probable origin of the addition and a neutrality violation.
 * March 3, 17:36 with an edit summary of “m Restoring valid, reliable independent sources that were deleted / replaced with irrelevant sources in the previous editing warring:” deleted “ ” (see the last bullet point of “The Actions of the IP Editor” above for the contents of Today (“rowdy”); added “  . The sole material in the Today (“Kaitlyn”) cite, which has the same author and publisher as, but a different date (which the named editor failed to change) from, the Today (“rowdy”) cite is ‘Indiggo, the Romanian twin sisters who have skated by on attitude and personality, got an earful of boos from the crowd throughout their performance of a campy, hokey song they said was written by Dieter Bohlen, a German producer. “Oh, well, no wonder; it’s bloody German!” Osbourne said. The Hoff, who arguably owes his musical career to the Greater Bavaria Area, said, “Oh, no, you don’t want to go there.” And Morgan couldn’t resist chiming in with, “We all know about German taste in music, don’t we?” Getting back to the twins, though, Morgan called them “the worst dancers and the worst singers in the competition.” “I think I speak for the whole of America,” Morgan said, “when I say that the sooner you are shipped back to Romania, the better.”’ It supports the booing and the quote, but is silent on elimination, although that seems to be implied. At the end of the Reality TV World cite is ‘This article uses material from the Wikipedia article "America's Got Talent (season 3)”.’ The most astonishing thing is that it tracks the language and format of America's Got Talent (season 3) until it ends abruptly after the fifth line of a ten line table. The material on Indiggo is just above the truncated table. There is more detail in my post on the  Reliable Sources Noticeboard. To my amazement, the essay on  fictitious references doesn’t cover the creation of a source.

Vyeh (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Afterword

 * Both the IP and the named accounts are stale or I would be sending this story to the appropriate administrator.


 * A second named editor, neutral in the edit war, re-inserted Today (“rowdy”) on March 4, 20:36 and a Romanian cite on March 4, 21:08 and changed “The audience were booing at Indiggo” to “The audience booed” and “and they were eliminated from the competition” to “but they were promoted in the competition to the Vegas round.” Using Google translation, the Romanian cite supports that Indiggo advanced to the semifinals. It is silent on the audience booing and the only reference to Piers Morgan is that he voted to advance them to the second round.

Vyeh (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

00:42, 26 March 2014, in violation of Wikipedia policy. Vyeh (talk) 02:09, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The second named editor inserted their birthdate on

The Seven Cites
When I started examining America’s Got Talent, there were seven cites to 'The audience booed, and judge Piers Morgan called Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition," but they were promoted in the competition to the semi-final Vegas round.'


 * New York Times, fictitious. Removed. (It  also supports the following sentence 'The New York Times described them as "America's Got Talent punching bags."' Because the quote was  “provided in passing ... that is not related to the principal topics of the publication," it is not reliable. Removed.)
 * TV episode, inserting editor relied on another Wikipedia article. Removed.
 * Today (“Kaitlyn”), same author, publisher, written in the same style as Today (“rowdy”), which is labeled “commentary,” which is "rarely reliable for statements of fact." Removed.
 * Reality TV World is not reliable since it "rel[ies] on material from Wikipedia as [a] source.". Removed.
 * The Huffington Post is labeled a blog and hence is an opinion piece which is "rarely reliable for statements of fact." Removed.
 * Today (“rowdy”) is labeled “commentary,” which is "rarely reliable for statements of fact." Removed.
 * Romanian cite only supports Indiggo advancing. Moved to first sentence of America's Got Talent.

Vyeh (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC), Vyeh (talk) 09:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC) and Vyeh (talk) 01:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Review
I've gone through, checked (in a couple of cases I had to refer to the archives) and changed the links from the cite web template to the citation template (since the punctuation is different). Vyeh (talk) 02:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Caramancia (New York Times)
The reference,, is used five times. The relevant passage says: 'Furthermore, a close reading of the liner notes reveals gems: ... a moving sample from the Indiggo Twins, “America’s Got Talent” punching bags and, as described here, “ambassadors of the great Romanian tradition” (which?).'

First, the source is being used to support "Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea, professionally known as ... Indiggo Twins." In connection with the identification of America's Got Talent and Romania, it is plausible. I will defer to the previous editors.

Second, it follows "composers." I think the reference would be better placed three phrases back, reality television personalities." I'm moving it.

Third, it supports in the section Music 'What The New York Times described as a "moving sample" from Indiggo's "LA LA LA" can be heard on rappers Jay-Z and Kanye West's 2011 studio album Watch the Throne on the song "Murder to Excellence."' It is plausible, since the source was focused on the review of the album, of which Indiggo was a portion. I will defer to the previous editors.

Fourth, it supports in the section 'America's Got Talent' 'The audience booed, and judge Piers Morgan called Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition," but they were promoted in the competition to the semi-final Vegas round.' (This sentence is followed by seven citations! Talk about citation overkill!) The source does not support this. I'm removing it.

Fifth, it supports the following sentence 'The New York Times described them as "America's Got Talent punching bags."'

WP:Biographies of living persons states "Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. ... We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."

The last sentence is followed by a footnote:

WP:Identifying reliable sources states "Information provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable; editors should cite sources focused on the topic at hand where possible."

The use of the term "punching bag" to describe Indiggo, which is the object of a single sentence about their music in a long review of a studio album by Kanye West and Jay-Z and not about America's Got Talent is "in passing" and not related to the studio album, Kanye West or Jay-Z.

Before I started editing Indiggo, Ian Thomson reverted an IP user, whom he thought was the band's manager, because that user edited "America's Got Talent."

It is clear "punching bag" is contentious and negative. While the New York Times is an otherwise reliable source, here is a case where describing Indiggo as punching bags may not be reliable. The admonitions "particular care," "right," "very firm," "must be supported ... to a reliable, published source," and "removed immediately and without waiting for discussion" mandates the removal of the sentence because "punching bags" was provided in passing and wasn't focused on Indiggo's performance or the judges' or audience behavior in America's got talent.

I've devoted a lot of time to removing one sentence because of the previous contentious history of this article, even though WP:Biographies of living persons states "The burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores material." Vyeh (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Content
I added "dancers" and "choreographers" to Indiggo's professions. There were numerous visual segments in the BronxNet video segment showing them dancing on stage. The City Guide NY source specifically said they choreographed the show. I added a sentence to the summary saying they opened Wicked Clone The Cinema Musical Off Broadway. It seemed to be as important as some of the other accomplishments listed in the summary. Vyeh (talk) 03:01, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Mother is manager
There are five citations that have been used to support the proposition that Violeta Modorcea is Indiggo's manager. See WP:Citation Overkill I've machine translated all of them (see /Translations) and three of them don't support the proposition.

The same five citations are used at the end of the sentence, "The twins' mother Violeta, who managed the duo, threatened to sue the Romanian TV station TVR which ran the contest for 100,000 Euro, asserting that her daughters' fans had been unable to enter votes in the televote due to faulty phone lines managed by Voxline Communications Company, but the TV station did not alter the standings," in the section Eurovision qualifications, so I suspect an editor simply reused all five citations. (And I think there may be a similar problem in using the problematical cites there.)

does not say the mother is the manager; it only says the mother threatened a suit for damages. also does not say the mother is the manager; it does go into even greater detail her actions. only says Indiggo claims damages.

The remaining two citations and  are from the same source, Ziare.com, on the same day. The failure of the latter cite to specify the date hides this. WP:Citation Overkill says "Another common form of citation overkill is to cite multiple reprintings of the same content"(!) I'll keep the first ziare.com reference and leave all five references following the sentence in Eurovision qualifications for later.

The mother being the Indiggo's manager is not controversial, so a single citation is sufficient. Vyeh (talk) 02:37, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Talent in Motion
http://www.timmag.com/winter10/pdfs/Page_3.pdf gives the name of the publisher: Talent in Motion, Inc. Vyeh (talk) 04:03, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

IMDb
I retained and updated. Because IMDb has received a lot of criticism as a reliable source, I'm using this source only in the way the previous editors did. Vyeh (talk) 17:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia says "Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is also generally unacceptable. Sites with user-generated content include ... the Internet Movie Database (IMDb)." has the attribution, "IMDb Mini Biography By: Anonymous." An anonymous user-generated content is clearly unreliable. I'm eliminating the source. Vyeh (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Mother is teacher and PhD
I added "a teacher of Romanian literature with a PhD in philology" after "Violetta Modorcea." From the source, which was used for Indiggo's father, "Violeta Modorcea, doctor in filologie, profesoara de literatura romana" Translating from Romanian to English with Google, "Violeta Modorcea, doctor of philology, Romanian literature teacher" I assumed the previous editor had checked the source for reliability. Vyeh (talk) 21:17, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

I ran the entire source through Google translator:

"World literature" is the usual English construction. Vyeh (talk) 17:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

See /Translations for the translation of the source. Vyeh (talk) 19:08, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Mother is writer
I added that the Violeta Modorcea is a writer. I used WorldCat as the reference. I ran a search and found five books. One was bilingual about Indiggo. I saw that WorldCat has an article. While there was some discussion in the archives of WP:RS/N about WorldCat, I didn't see anything suggesting that it would be unreliable in supporting the existence of a print book. Vyeh (talk) 19:19, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I added a second reference for Violeta Modorcea being a writer:. The source had an option for English, which I used. The University of Craiova has a wikipedia article. Common sense suggest that the Library of the University of Caiova is a reliable source for the author and titles of the books in its collection. Vyeh (talk) 01:36, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Becoming Citizens
The existing source was the subject of a lot of discussion. (see /Archive 1) I updated it to

First, the URL was roundabout so I simplified it to what appears in my browser. Second, I put in a missing exclamation mark. I added Indiggo and Indiggo Twins as the author because that is what the source said. I suppose I can drop one of them since Indiggo makes it clear they are the same entity.

There was no date associated with the source to support that they had become citizens in October 2013. The source mentioned a URL (no link) to a video. Since I know the video was published by Indiggo, I believe this eliminates the general problem with using a video on YouTube, much in the same way I could use a BronxNet video. The video has a publication date, which supports when they became American citizens. So I added as a reference to them becoming U.S. citizens. Vyeh (talk) 20:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Mihaela is 5 minutes older
For the reference used to support that Mihaela is five minutes older than Gabriela, the February 24, 2014 date is wrong. There is a directory tree just above the title that translates to Formula AS> Archive> Year 2000> Number 442> Adolescent Asians> Adolescent Asians. Vyeh (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Twins Indiggo
is a source: "Other reliable sources include ... [b]ooks published by respected publishing houses." Sim Art has a defunct website. Aius exists. The book is written by their father, an apparent conflict of interest, making it a questionable source. Wikipedia says:

"Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
 * 1) the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
 * 2) it does not involve claims about third parties;
 * 3) it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
 * 4) there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
 * 5) the article is not based primarily on such sources."

Date of birth
contains the date of their birth. I was going to add it to the year. However, Wikipedia's policy on Biographies of Living Persons &sect; Privacy of personal information and using primary sources states: "If a subject complains about our inclusion of their date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year, provided that there is a reliable source for it." So I left the sentence, "The twin sisters were born in 1985 in Brașov, Transylvania, Romania." Vyeh (talk) 04:19, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

News and Reviews
I was active on Wikipedia 8 years ago, primarily working on Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri.

I’m interested in adding a section to the Indiggo page about a show that appeared Off-Broadway in New York, New York, USA in 2017 and 2018. I intend to use as my source news items and reviews that appears in www.cityguideny.com, www.broadway.com, www.theatermania.com and www.stagebuddy.com:


 * https://www.broadwayworld.com/shows/backstage.php?showid=332584#content
 * https://www.broadwayworld.com/off-broadway/article/New-Musical-WICKED-CLONE-Tale-Of-A-Vampire-Bitten-By-A-Human-Opens-Thursday-At-The-Davenport-Theatre-20180306
 * https://www.cityguideny.com/article/Wicked-Clone-Off-Broadway-Davenport-Theatre#.Wz6nhEyZPwc
 * https://www.theatermania.com/off-broadway/news/meet-the-transylvanian-twins-behind-the-craziest-s_82933.html
 * https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Donna-McKechnie-Led-ICON-and-More-Slated-for-2016-New-York-New-Works-Theatre-Festival-20160824
 * https://stagebuddy.com/theater/theater-review/review-wicked-clone-deal-evil

Based on my rereading of WP:RS and finding that these four websites have been used as sources in wikipedia articles, I believe I can write a properly sourced paragraph.

In reviewing this talk page, I noticed there has been a lot of disagreement about whether sources are reliable. Before I put further time and effort into adding a section about the group’s show, I think it would be prudent to see if any editor had issues with these four websites.

Thank you. Vyeh (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Looking a little more closely at them than I did on my talk page, the first broadwayworld.com entry seems to be a directory entry (not good) but the others (from that site and the rest) seem to be valid news pieces (or close enough). I could begin to imagine that a couple are press releases but we're not looking to write a new article so I'm not too worried about that.
 * Most of the past cases of disagreeing over sources were a result of the group's manager citing self-published sources that tangentially mentioned something kinda related to the group, or reliable sources for claims that weren't actually in the source. The only time I'm spotting where any of those sources were called into question was not so much doubting Broadwayworld.com as a source, but whether or not it supported a statement it was cited for.
 * I'm pretty sure you're in the clear. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:20, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

BronxNet and Barnes & Noble
What is the policy on youtube videos? I have a BronxNet (501c3 organization teaching Bronx residents TV production, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeqCi8HfzVlmLyhjJePMh9Q/about) link of interview with some audience members and Indiggo, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S00VyUyjxtk The theatermania link pointed to a Barnes & Noble webpage in discussing the novel on which the show is based, https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/wicked-clone-or-how-to-deal-with-the-evil-mihaela-modorcea/1123648466?type=eBook. May I include that as a reference? Thank you for your help. Vyeh (talk) 22:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The B&N website would come across as WP:REFSPAM for the novel.
 * The oversimplified answer for Youtube is usually "don't use it as a source" because most videos on there fall under WP:SPS or maybe WP:PRIMARY and WP:SELFPUB. The more nuanced answer is that otherwise reliable sources that happen to be hosted on Youtube may be used.  The BronxNet video, if properly cited (Youtube is just the link, BronxNet is the publisher), could be construed as public access news. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:34, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Conclusions
Based on my previous WikiPedia experience, some very contentious discussion in the archives and the recent additions by an IP editor and reversion by Ian Thomson, I am documenting my editorial judgments. I just read WP:Identifying Reliable Sources, which states that editorial judgment is an "indispensable part of the process" in determining reliable sources. In addition to our conversations on these talk pages, I had also had a discussion with Ian Thomson on his talk page, where he mentioned neutrality. WP:Neutral Point of View says "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." I intend to stick to the sources identified above, which is also mandated by WP:No Original Research.
 * I accept Ian's judgment that the Broadway World directory listing is not good
 * and that the Barnes & Noble link is WP:REFSPAM.
 * I plan to use the BronxNet video properly cited.
 * After reviewing the stage buddy site, I judge that it is not reliable. Apparently anyone can becoming a reviewer by sending an email (https://stagebuddy.com/about).
 * As for the Broadway World, City Guide NY and Theater Mania links, WP:IRS also says common sense is an indispensable part of the process. For an Off-Broadway show, there won't be a New York Times, New York Post or New York Daily News article or review. I judge Broadway World, City Guide NY and Theater Mania to be sufficiently reliable for the purpose for inclusion into this article.

In addition to re-reading Wikipedia's three core content policies, I also read WP:Biographies of Living Persons. I noted "Living persons may publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if: As Ian pointed out, a couple of my sources could be press releases. In addition, the BronxNet video contains an interview with Indiggo, which I may use.
 * 1) it is not unduly self-serving;
 * 2) it does not involve claims about third parties;
 * 3) it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
 * 4) there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
 * 5) the article is not based primarily on such sources."

As I stated at the beginning of this comment, I am documenting my editorial decisions because of my previous experience. In editing Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri from class C to GA, there was disagreement.

From what I read in the now archived talk, there was much more disagreement for Indiggo. I believe that by documenting my editorial judgments as I make them, I give interested editors a chance to comment before I've expended a lot of time and effort editing and I provide a record in case administrative intervention becomes necessary.

On his talk page, Ian described me as a "good-faith editor." I hope this explanation of my reasoning demonstrates my good-faith, even when we have the inevitable disagreements about the meaning of Wikipedia's guidance. Vyeh (talk) 03:08, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Libertatea
comes from Libertatea.ro, which an editor described as unreliable: doesn't "seem to fact check, and that is our #1 requirement for reliable sources." Vyeh (talk) 21:32, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

The source contains the statement, "On Broadway, the play in which the two sisters appear, Modorcea is the first to play twins." Only the editor mentioned in the preceding paragraph expressed skepticism about the source. Another editor claimed a Libertatea.ro cite is a "reliable citation." Not surprisingly, I didn't find any other mention of Libertatia or Libertatia.ro at the  Reliable Sources Noticeboard. The Wikipedia stub article Libertatia:

Libertatea (lit. '"Liberty"') is a Romanian newspaper published in Bucharest. It was the first newspaper to appear after the Romanian Revolution.

History and profile

The paper was started in 1989. The first edition was published at midday on 22 December 1989, being the first newspaper to announce that the communist ruler, President Nicolae Ceausescu, had fled the capital in a helicopter. The former newspaper was named Informaţia Bucureştiului. Sorin Rosca Stanescu was a journalist at the former newspaper and worked with Octavian Andronic, the founder of the new newspaper Libertatea.

It was restyled as a tabloid newspaper in 1994 when it was bought by Ringier. Nowadays it features a bikini-clad girl as the "Page Five Girl". The newspaper is generally socially progressive in values and has a libertarian political viewpoint, in line with its title.

Libertatea.ro

Today, the Libertatea.ro site is one of the most visited web sites in Romania. With a monthly average of more than 40 million impressions, Libertatea.ro ranks among the top two general news sites in Romania.

Revolutionary design and quality content make Libertatea.ro the source of daily information for millions of Romanians both in the country and abroad.

Offering a balanced mix of exclusive social, political, sports, celebrities or life stories, Libertatea.ro is a source of respect when it comes to new information.

Being one of the first news sites in Romania, Libertatea.ro has a valuable archive for its readers.

I'll use the statement for now, as I look for more guidance on the reliability of Libertatia. Vyeh (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Rusakiewicz (About Me)
is user generated content: "Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is also generally unacceptable. Sites with user-generated content include personal websites." Removed. Vyeh (talk) 02:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure
I referred to *WP:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure for guidance on the information to include in a description about musical theatre. It specifically said "source material (based on a book, etc.)", so I included the sentence about Indiggo's book. It also mentioned critical reception. I judged Griffin Miller as the theatre editor of a WP:Reliable Source was a suitable critic.

Because I expect to continue editing the section and to give other editors a chance to rearrange the section, I did not use the ref naming convention. It will be easy enough for someone to do that once the section is stable.

The BronxNet clip had a couple of visuals I used. The name of the reporter is "Ashley Tiffany." In her opening narrative, she describes the show as "a blend of musical theatre and film." She goes on to say "Based on their best selling Barnes and Noble novel, 'Wicked Clone or how to deal with evil, ..." There was a shot of the novel's cover, from which I inserted the missing "the" in front of "evil" and took the description "cinema novel," which I used in the text.

I expect there will be the usual tweaking by editors. I've been very careful to work from the sources. Everything is supported by reliable sources, on which I consulted with an experienced editor. There is no original research. And I've used an "encyclopedic" tone recommended by *WP:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure. Vyeh (talk) 19:24, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Last sentence from subsection "Acting"
I moved the last sentence "In June 2012 Indiggo presented a first version of their musical play "Wicked Clone" at the Ensemble Studio Theatre in New York City." along with its citation from the subsection "Acting" to the subsection "Wicked Clone The Cinema Musical" because it belongs in the latter section more than the former.

BronxNet Video Partial Transcript
Ashley Tiffaney begins: "Created and performed by the Indiggo Twins, we take a walk into a blend of musical theatre and film that transports the audience from 15th century Transylvania to modern day New York City. Based on their best-selling novel, 'Wicked Clone or how to deal with evil,' the cinema musical proves they're not your average twins."

At [2:15] Gabriela Modorcea (identified as Singer, Performer, co-Playwriter, Actress, Composer) says: "We have been working on the project for eight years. And it is the music album, sound track ... the 90 minute sound track ..."

At [2:20] Mihaela Modorcea (identified as Singer, Performer, co-Playwriter, Actress, Author) says: "Gabriela composed ... Gabriela, my little Mozart, composed the 90 minute sound track and it's like a film score and it's a blend between music, choreography, acting, costumes ..." Vyeh (talk) 23:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

AllMusic
is a reliable source. Vyeh (talk) 18:18, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Bild
I have had discussions with User:DGG and User:BlaueBlüte, who said, "The view on Bild among German Wikipedia editors appears to be boiling down to this: Identifying reliable sources starts with the image and text below and to the right: WP:BLPSOURCES states "Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism." From Bild, 'Der Spiegel wrote in 2006 that Bild "flies just under the nonsense threshold of American and British tabloids ... For the German desperate, it is a daily dose of high-resolution soft porn". '
 * Can be used if no other sources available.
 * However, frowned upon by some on principle.
 * If no other sources are available, that’s considered suggestive of a lack of relevance of the topic."

I've decided that Bild is not a reliable source. Vyeh (talk) 20:53, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Caramancia (New York Times)
Excerpt of post in the Summary/Sources section above:

The reference,, is used five times. The relevant passage says: 'Furthermore, a close reading of the liner notes reveals gems: ... a moving sample from the Indiggo Twins, “America’s Got Talent” punching bags and, as described here, “ambassadors of the great Romanian tradition” (which?).'

...

Third, it supports in the section Music 'What The New York Times described as a "moving sample" from Indiggo's "LA LA LA" can be heard on rappers Jay-Z and Kanye West's 2011 studio album Watch the Throne on the song "Murder to Excellence."' It is plausible, since the source was focused on the review of the album, of which Indiggo was a portion. I will defer to the previous editors.

...

Vyeh (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

CuCurIgo
is a web page that exists to sell downloads. The original cite is. "Download Indigo – Nu-mi Pasa (premium) – CuCurIgu.mobi &#124; Cucurigu" appears when the cursor is placed on the tab in my browser.

Identifying reliable sources says

"Although the content guidelines for external links prohibits linking to "Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services," inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages such as that of a book on a bookseller's page or an album on its streaming-music page, in order to verify such things as titles and running times. Journalistic and academic sources are preferable, however, and e-commerce links should be replaced with non-commercial reliable sources if available."

A non-commercial source is available. The source, www.stiri.com.ro, didn't come up on a search of the Reliable Sources Noticeboard, so I'm assuming the good faith and competence of the editor providing it and assume it is reliable. So I am removing CuCurIgo. Vyeh (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Discogs
is an unreliable source: "Per Wikipedia's guideline on user-generated sources, websites with user-generated content should never be used as sources since they have little or no editorial oversight. This may include  ... product-related sites such as ... Discogs" Vyeh (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

iTunes
Identifying reliable sources says "Although the content guidelines for external links prohibits linking to "Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services," inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages such as that of a book on a bookseller's page or an album on its streaming-music page, in order to verify such things as titles and running times. Journalistic and academic sources are preferable, however, and e-commerce links should be replaced with non-commercial reliable sources if available." supports 'On December 16, 2011, DAS Label, Inc. released Indiggo's "La La La."' Release date, name of publisher, artist and name of song are in line with titles and running time.

Discogs
is an unreliable source: "Per Wikipedia's guideline on user-generated sources, websites with user-generated content should never be used as sources since they have little or no editorial oversight. This may include  ... product-related sites such as ... Discogs." Removed.

esc-history.com
is a fictitious reference. It is being used to support "The duo also missed the music video filming and TV show for the promotion of their song, saying that they had some concerts in the United States." It only says

"Disqualified 2 Indiggo Love Struck Disqualified"

It is already supporting "However, they were disqualified," written in a slightly different way. So we have the same cite written to appear as two cites. Vyeh (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

esctoday.com
is a fictitious reference. It is being used to support "The duo also missed the music video filming and TV show for the promotion of their song, saying that they had some concerts in the United States." It is a list of the 24 semi-finalists. I'm moving it to the sentence supporting Indiggo qualifying for the semi-finals. Vyeh (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Eurovision RfC on reliable sources for Eurovision articles "consensus as follows:...
 * ESCToday: Reliable. Among the remaining sources, ESCToday has the clearest support. User:Jezhotwells makes a strong case against consideration as a reliable source, but others report that the site has some reliable media presence and that the opinions of at least Barry Viniker have been quoted in reliable press. Knowing nothing of it aside from what I've read here, I would myself use it with care, in line with User:SilkTork's suggestions. I would be prepared for it to be challenged at FA, as this conversation suggests it is unlikely to be viewed as "high quality." With this one in particular, I would suggest contributors to the project keep an eye on evolution. If the contributors to this conversation are correct, it may be evolving into a fully reliable source, but I suspect based on the opposition discussion it did receive that there would be others within the wider community who would continue at this point to view it with suspicion."

Vyeh (talk) 14:13, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Hotnews.ro
is a fictitious reference. It does not support "They qualified for the final round in the National Semi-Final on February 24, and finished 7th out of 12 finalists in the National Final on February 26, having received a poor response from the judges but a better response in the televote," nor does it support the following sentence "The twins' mother Violeta, who managed the duo, threatened to sue the Romanian TV station TVR which ran the contest for 100,000 Euro, asserting that her daughters' fans had been unable to enter votes in the televote due to faulty phone lines managed by Voxline Communications Company, but the TV station did not alter the standings." I am removing it in both places. Vyeh (talk) 09:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC) and Vyeh (talk) 13:40, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Jurnalul.ro
is a fictitious reference. It does not support the sentence "They qualified for the final round in the National Semi-Final on February 24, and finished 7th out of 12 finalists in the National Final on February 26, having received a poor response from the judges but a better response in the televote." I'm removing it. Vyeh (talk) 08:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Kerr (Esc United)
2605:E000:9149:A600:60D0:33C0:BE27:3A89 made a spelling change from "Selectia Nationla (Romania)" to "Selectia National (Romania)" in. I checked the reference. The paragraph heading in the webpage cited is "Selectia Nationala (Romania)". Checking the talk page for User talk:2605:E000:9149:A600:60D0:33C0:BE27:3A89, it appears he/she ran a mechanical spell check on a lot of articles. However, the paragraph heading uses Romanian spelling. The reference was substandard, so I added the author, correct title, date, publisher and access date. I decided to mention "see the paragraph Selectia Nationala (Romania)" in the reference to keep that portion of the original reference for now. I think the reference should be attached to the previous sentence, but that can wait until I look at the section. Vyeh (talk) 17:51, 11 August 2018 (UTC) and Vyeh (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

The citation is being used to support " The duo also missed the music video filming and TV show for the promotion of their song, saying that they had some concerts in the United States." The material in the source on Indiggo is

"Indiggo: “Lovestruck” 2007 Selectia Nationala – disqualified Thomas’s first Romanian entry sadly did not have a happy ending. Indiggo did not turn up on time for a rehearsal, and an instrumental version of the song was not sent in time to the TV Company. Thus, they were disqualified."

So, it is a fictitious reference. While it could be used to support missing rehearsals or not providing an instrumental version in time, I'm moving it to support that Indiggo was qualified with Lovestruck. Vyeh (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

last.fm
is a fictitious reference having nothing to do with "They qualified for the final round in the National Semi-Final on February 24, and finished 7th out of 12 finalists in the National Final on February 26, having received a poor response from the judges but a better response in the televote." The closest connection is a double listing for Mihai Trăistariu, who represented Romania and came in 4th in Eurovision 2006. I'm removing this reference. Vyeh (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Laut.de
is a fictitious reference. It does not support "They qualified for the final round in the National Semi-Final on February 24, and finished 7th out of 12 finalists in the National Final on February 26, having received a poor response from the judges but a better response in the televote." I am removing it. Vyeh (talk) 08:46, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

The Malta Independent
is a fictitious reference. It is being used to support "However, they were disqualified from the contest due to not showing up for rehearsals." It does not mention disqualification, let alone missing rehearsals. I'm moving the cite to the previous sentence, which mentions "Lovestruck." Vyeh (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Poehls and Peters (Bild)
is from the newspaper Bild. The Reliable Sources Noticeboard has two discussions on the Bild: December 2008 and February 2014. The consensus is that it can be used with caution. Vyeh (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

telegrafonline.ro
is a fictitious reference. It is used to support "However, they were disqualified." It says "Lovestruck," Indiggo's song, remains in the competition. I'm moving it to the previous sentence since that sentence mentions "Lovestruck." Vyeh (talk) 17:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Voce.ro
is a fictitious reference. Safari can't find the server "voce.ro." The wayback machine said, "Sorry. Wayback Machine failed to return archive information." I'm removing the reference. Vyeh (talk) 17:46, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Ziare.com
and are from the same source, Ziare.com, on the same day. The failure of the latter cite to specify the date hides this. WP:Citation Overkill says "Another common form of citation overkill is to cite multiple reprintings of the same content"(!) I'll only use one ziare.com reference at any point. Vyeh (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

The twins' mother ... damages
Currently, the Eurovision section gives undue weight to the behind-the-scenes actions of Indiggo’s mother and manager and contains minutiae for the competition results. Keeping articles to a reasonable size is important for Wikipedia's accessibility. Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful. A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details.  Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: “merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.”

In a message to Ian, I said

" At am a 頭 statement, “I’m sure I protected the wrong version,” was no joke.  When  At am a  頭  lifted page protection on February 21, there was no mention of Eurovision. The registered editor, mentioned in the previous message,
 * added on February 21 21:10 five sentences and five sources (two were cites to Wikipedia) and failed to mention the additional sources in the edit summary, “Removal of unsourced/fake/self-promotional content, rewriting some to accurately reflect the few, near non existent sources"
 * removed on February 22 12:54 a statement exonerating Indiggo of a plagiarism charge, saying in the edit summary, “Shortening of the 2007 disqualified contest details giving due weight to it”
 * introduced on March 3 17:36 four sources, saying in the edit summary “m (Restoring valid, reliable independent sources that were deleted / replaced with irrelevant sources in the previous editing warring)”
 * perhaps as a final insult and violating Wikipedia policy, added on October 11 18:23 Indiggo’s birth date and 2 sources to the info box.

Another registered editor on March 25 quadrupled the content and sources, with virtually all of the sources in Romanian and German. The second registered editor’s last contribution was three years ago. Checking the cites for accuracy will require days of machine translation. (The second registered editor added a Romanian cite to a sentence about America's Got Talent on March 4, 20:36 and changed the sentence from “they were eliminated” to “they were promoted,” without moving the existing six cites, several of which supported elimination!)"

When I wrote the message, I assumed the good faith of the second registered editor. In the last three hours, I have checked the cites relating to Eurovision 2006 and removed 4 fictitious references.

My message to Ian concludes: "My edits appear to favor Indiggo because I started with an  attack page. Rather than twisting or censoring the truth, I am removing bad-faith material as I check sources and treat verifiable and sourced statements with appropriate weight, as  Wikipedia requires."

I am removing "The twins' mother Violeta, who managed the duo, threatened to sue the Romanian TV station TVR which ran the contest for 100,000 Euro, asserting that her daughters' fans had been unable to enter votes in the televote due to faulty phone lines managed by Voxline Communications Company, but the TV station did not alter the standings. Voxline reserved the right to sue the twins for damages," moving toward neutral point of view. Vyeh (talk) 16:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Caramancia (New York Times)
Excerpt of post in the Summary/Sources section above:

The reference,, is used five times. The relevant passage says: 'Furthermore, a close reading of the liner notes reveals gems: ... a moving sample from the Indiggo Twins, “America’s Got Talent” punching bags and, as described here, “ambassadors of the great Romanian tradition” (which?).'

...

Fourth, it supports in the section 'America's Got Talent' 'The audience booed, and judge Piers Morgan called Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition," but they were promoted in the competition to the semi-final Vegas round.' (This sentence is followed by seven citations! Talk about citation overkill!) The source does not support this. I'm removing it.

Fifth, it supports the following sentence 'The New York Times described them as "America's Got Talent punching bags."'

WP:Biographies of living persons states "Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. ... We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."

The last sentence is followed by a footnote:

WP:Identifying reliable sources states "Information provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable; editors should cite sources focused on the topic at hand where possible."

The use of the term "punching bag" to describe Indiggo, which is the object of a single sentence about their music in a long review of a studio album by Kanye West and Jay-Z and not about America's Got Talent is "in passing" and not related to the studio album, Kanye West or Jay-Z.

Before I started editing Indiggo, Ian Thomson reverted an IP user, whom he thought was the band's manager, because that user edited "America's Got Talent."

It is clear "punching bag" is contentious and negative. While the New York Times is an otherwise reliable source, here is a case where describing Indiggo as punching bags may not be reliable. The admonitions "particular care," "right," "very firm," "must be supported ... to a reliable, published source," and "removed immediately and without waiting for discussion" mandates the removal of the sentence because "punching bags" was provided in passing and wasn't focused on Indiggo's performance or the judges' or audience behavior in America's got talent.

I've devoted a lot of time to removing one sentence because of the previous contentious history of this article, even though WP:Biographies of living persons states "The burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores material." Vyeh (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

"Top 40, Part 1". America's Got Talent. Season 3. Episode 14. September 9, 2008."
I've been checking sources, even machine translating Romanian sources (see /Translations). The first source to "The audience booed, and judge Piers Morgan called Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition," but they were promoted in the competition to the semi-final Vegas round." is "Top 40, Part 1". America's Got Talent. Season 3. Episode 14. September 9, 2008." This isn't available on DVD or at the nbc.com site.

I went through the revision history and found where the sentence first came up. Note "Cite error: The named reference ep14 was invoked but never defined (see the help page)" in the references.

America's Got Talent (season 3) says "Half of the audience were booing at Indiggo and Morgan called them "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition. Eliminated" It refers to 'ref name="ep14"'

Clearly the editor lifted the sentence and the citation from another Wikipedia article without looking at the source. WP:WPNOTRS says "Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact checking or accuracy" and "Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose." WP:Verifiability says "Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly." Since that editor didn't review the secondary source "Top 40, Part 1". America's Got Talent. Season 3. Episode 14. September 9, 2008," I'm removing it. The statement still has five sources, so it remains. Vyeh (talk) 10:55, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

WP:Verifiability says "Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly."

In the references section is the following message, "This article relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this by adding secondary or tertiary sources. (September 2016)" "Top 40, Part 1". America's Got Talent. Season 3. Episode 14. September 9, 2008." is also a primary source, another reason for its deletion. Vyeh (talk) 04:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

"Citation of a TV broadcast" at the Reliable sources noticeboard suggests primary sources may be used under certain circumstances. Wikipedia's policy against original research would preclude the episode being used to support "Half of the audience were booing at Indiggo" because Wikipedia says, "Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source."

Season 3 of America's Got Talent is not available on DVD. Only the current season is available on nbc.com. A Google search failed to find episodes of Season 3. It is very likely Season 3 was not available when the IP user inserted the reference, violating the command, "Confirm that these sources support the content." In copying the reference, including its name, "ep14," the IP editor was relying on the wikipedia article, violating the injunction, "Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose."

Since the source was inserted in violation of wikipedia policy, I removed it. If an editor can confirm that "Top 40, Part 1". America's Got Talent. Season 3. Episode 14. September 9, 2008." supports 'Morgan called them "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition. Eliminated,' then the statement and source can be inserted subject to wikipedia policy including neutral point of view and biography of living persons. Vyeh (talk) 01:41, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Martin (Huffington Post)
Having discovered that there were several edit wars requiring page protection, I've become less deferential to the existing work. is labeled -THE BLOG right above the title. WP:Identifying reliable sources says "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact."

At the bottom is "To communicate with or to be contacted by the executives and/or companies mentioned in this column, link to the JackMyers Connection Hotline," an image containing "JackMyers.com" and "This post originally appeared at JackMyers.com." Ed Martin is identified as "Editor and TV Critic, MediaVillage.com" However, MediaVillage, founded by Jack Myers, says "Our team of experienced trade journalists create, ghost write and edit your original thought-leadership commentaries, social media content, speeches and presentations, all designed to positively influence the perceptions of your business-to-business constituencies through a consistent, coordinated and relevant communications program."

So we have an opinion piece written to foster business-to-business contact. Since it is not reliable, I'm removing it, leaving four sources. My suspicion is that its placement was an example of citation overkill. Vyeh (talk) 16:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Carreau (AOL TV/The Huffington Post)
is a dead URSL (using the WayBack Machine produces ) and it says "Filed under: OpEd” at the top. WP:Identifying reliable sources says "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact."

Hence, it is not reliable. It was supporting "The show began with an audition in New York City, which the twins passed, and they were then promoted to the next stage of Las Vegas callbacks." , having been moved from the last sentence, now supports the sentence. So I'm removing it. Vyeh (talk) 20:30, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

America's Got Talent 3 (Courtesy Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) (realitytvworld)
At the very top of the source is the title. There is the title given in the cite "America's Got Talent 3." Directly after those words in half the font size is "(Courtesy Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)." The total title is "America's Got Talent 3 (Courtesy Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)"

At the very bottom is "This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.It uses material from the Wikipedia article "America's Got Talent (season 3)". Reality TV World is not responsible for any errors or omissions this article may contain."

The article ends shortly after the entry about Indiggo. In fact, the Elimination Table, Week 4 ends abruptly after five performers (in America's Got Talent (season 3), there are ten) and doesn't include the Buzzes and judges' choices (America's Got Talent (season 3)) does. The article does not have Top 20, Top 10 or Top 5. So a reader would not know who won. My speculation is that the article was planted to provide a cite.

In any case, WP:Verifiability says "do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources." Since America's Got Talent 3 (Courtesy Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) (realitytvworld) explicitly states its material comes from Wikipedia, I'm deleting it. Vyeh (talk) 04:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Balta (Today.com), "A rowdy beginning ..." and "Kaitlyn"
and are both written by Victor Balta and published by Today.com.

Balta, "A rowdy beginning ..." is labeled "COMMENTARY" under the byline. Balta, "Kaitlyn ..." is not labeled. However, they have a similar style. "Commentary" is an apt label for both of them. Victor Balta is identified as a "msnnbc.com contributor" and is identified at the bottom. "Victor Balta is a writer in Philadelphia." Identifying reliable sources says

"News sources often contain both factual content and opinion content. ... Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are ... rarely reliable for statements of fact."

They're not reliable, so I'm removing them. Vyeh (talk) 07:02, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

"The audience booed"
Ian told me (User_talk:Ian.thomson)

"One of the biggest things I use to spot the manager's socks (I suspect sometimes the band members themselves) is how they'll try to twist or censor what happened on America's Got Talent, sometimes citing clearly unreliable sources (such as Wikia) to do so; ..."

So I'm being extra careful about editing the America's Got Talent section. First, I went through the existing sources. One made a comment about Indiggo was in passing. Two were labeled opinion pieces. One was a primary source and it appeared that a previous editor had copied it from Wikipedia without reviewing it. And the fifth explicitly stated it was using a Wikipedia article.

There is no direct support for "The audience booed." states "Indiggo, the Romanian twin sisters who have skated by on attitude and personality, got an earful of boos from the crowd" but the same author in another article said

"Host Jerry Springer announced that the twist to this season’s audition process was that acts would perform for the first time in front of a packed theater. ... Other times, it devolved into a rowdy mess that looked a little more like that other show Springer is known for hosting. As if the judges’ big, red X’s and loud buzzers weren’t embarrassing enough, the addition of a jeering crowd served to add to the discomfort for the performers and the viewers."

The last sentence suggests that the jeering crowd was a part of the show, like the big red X's and loud buzzers. The sentence first appeared on February 21, 2014 as "The audience were booing at Indiggo." The edit summary included "rewriting some to accurately reflect the few, near non existent sources." There were only two sources, Caramancia (New York Times) (which says nothing about booing) and "Top 40, Part 1". America's Got Talent. Season 3. Episode 14. September 9, 2008," a primary source that isn't on DVD and would have long been off nbc.com in 2014. The following does appear on America's Got Talent (season 3), using the same reference: "Half of the audience were booing at Indiggo." Despite the omission of "Half of," the sentence suggests that the editor took the material from another wikipedia article.

WP:Biographies of living persons states

"Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively .... Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, .... The burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores material."

While I could write a couple of paragraphs discussing the packed theater with jeering crowds and say that Indiggo, like most of the other contestants, had to deal with crowd noise, that would distract from the main point of the section which is that Indiggo made the semifinals.

Another factor in my thinking is the history of the article. There were two times the page had to be protected because of edit wars. On one side were sock puppets of someone connected to Indiggo. The other side was equally energetic. The sock puppets had put in] "In 2008, Indiggo qualified for the semi-finals of America's Got Talent." without any citations. Later an editor added to the sentence (which had acquired a citation by then) "Judge Piers Morgan called Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the entire competition."

And then the phrase about the audience booing was added. Between digressing from the fact that Indiggo advanced to the semifinals and eliminating "The audience booed" where reliable sources suggest that booing by some members of the audience was a normal state, I believe neutral point of view is best served by eliminating "The audience booed." In addition, they advanced after the "earful of boos."

WP:Biography of living persons states

"We must get the article . Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be . Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing."

There is a footnote after the second to the last sentence:

So, I'm eliminating "The audience booed" for being poorly sourced because all I have is that they got an "earful of boos from the crowd," and my reliable sources suggest booing by some members was normal. Vyeh (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I've determined that Balta ("Kaitlyn ...") is not a reliable source. "The audience booed" is unsourced. The reason for removing it is even stronger. Vyeh (talk) 07:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

"the worst dancers and the worst singers in the competition"
I've determined that Balta ("Kaitlyn ...") is not a reliable source. The quote "the worst dancers and the worst singers in the competition" is not sourced. Vyeh (talk) 07:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Merger into the following section
After eliminating unacceptable sources, unsourced content and redundancy, the sole remaining sentence in the section was "In 2008, Indiggo qualified for the top-40 Las Vegas semi-finals on Season 3 of America's Got Talent, an American television reality show talent competition." supported by the MediaxFax source. I merged the section into the following section, placing the remaining sentence at the end of the merged section, "Stage, Film and Television." Vyeh (talk) 00:37, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

IMDb
No Love in the City (2009) Full Cast and Crew and Mihaela Modorcea are two IMDb sources supporting 'Mihaela and Gabriela Modorcea acted together in the Russian/American film Lyubov v bolshom gorode as "Bliznyashka No. 1." and "Bliznyashka No. 2."'

In general, Wikipedia says "Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is also generally unacceptable. Sites with user-generated content include ... the Internet Movie Database (IMDb)." Vyeh (talk) 00:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

No Love in the City (2009) Full Cast and Crew
According to the essay "Citing IMDb", No Love in the City (2009) Full Cast and Crew is a  disputed use, "IMDb content which is in dispute about whether it is appropriate to reference on Wikipedia: Released films only: Sections such as the cast list, character names, the crew lists, ...." The Reliable Sources Noticeboard has a section  "Is IMDb reliable for filmography credits?" The conclusion to a remarkably short and amicable discussion, unlike the usual contentious arguments, was that Wikipedia "historically allowed IMDB for filmography and casting info." Vyeh (talk) 00:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Mihaela Modorcea
Mihaela Modorcea links to Mihaela Modorcea Biography, which contains the attribution, "IMDb Mini Biography By: Gabriela Modorcea (as modified by Daniel Frank Webster)." Wikipedia has a content guideline: "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves ... so long as the following criteria are met:
 * The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.
 * It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities).
 * It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject.
 * There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity.
 * The article is not based primarily on such sources.

Vyeh (talk) 00:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

/Archive 1
I archived old talk (last non-bot comment was 1 July 2015; last bot comment was 13 November 2017) to /Archive 1 for convenience. Vyeh (talk) 00:16, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

/Translations
I created a subpage /Translations as a workpage. (See WP:WORP). I labeled it as "Translations" rather than as "Dumping Ground" for my convenience. Vyeh (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2018 (UTC)