Talk:Joyce DeWitt

Confused
what happened in August with Ms. Dewitt? 38.22.128.42 (talk) 00:30, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

DUI
Is it worth mentioning a run of the mill DUI that occurred long ago with no follow up controversy/criminal activity? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.224.118.102 (talk) 02:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * you've spotted a fundamental flaw of wikipedia - just like there are articles about people who were famous for 15 min and decades later people scratch their heads wondering who the heck they are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:801:300:7520:EC4C:3BAA:A1AE:F89B (talk) 09:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Section removed for lacking citations
The section that said "In 2008, she appeared in the indie film Failing Better Now. In 2009, DeWitt starred in a stage production of Married Alive in Calgary, Alberta, Canada." was removed for being "unsourced", and yet the editor who did that could have easily sourced those two things in ten seconds instead of removing the entire section. "Failing Better Now" has an IMDB page (albeit the date of release is listed as "2010" instead of "2008"), and it only took five seconds to find a review of the "Married Alive" play in Calgary.

Links:

[]

[]

In the interest of giving the benefit of the doubt, if there is a specific and legitimate reason the section was removed entirely instead of updated with citations (apart from "because I didn't feel like adding citations"), could we know that reason? Kubrickrules (talk) 00:59, 1 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that feedback, @Kubrickrules. I'm glad that you found a citation for Married Alive so quickly after the content had sat unsourced for more than a year. I took the liberty of adding the citation that you provided to the text to replace the "Citation needed" template.
 * Unfortunately, the IMDb citation that you provided cannot be used in the article because IMDb is not a reliable source. Please see WP:IMDB for comments. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Kubrickrules: Is there is a specific and legitimate reason the section was removed entirely instead of updated with citations?


 * Yes. It's because you chose not to add them for some reason. Nightscream (talk) 04:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The reason is because it's not my page, I didn't author any of it, and I have very limited knowledge of how to perform coding functions on Wikipedia apart from minor edits. Maybe someday, I'll have greater knowledge, but for now, I'll defer to those who know better. I have nothing to do with this article and only stumbled upon it for the first time last week. The citations are literally right there. You add them. Kubrickrules (talk) 04:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)


 * It isn't "my page" either. On Wikipedia, no one editor "owns" any article.


 * As for "coding", I'm not clear on what you mean by this. You seem to have some of that knowledge too, having just demonstrated on this page that you have the ability to compose a paragraph and cite a source, no doubt on account of the nearly 400 edits you've accumulated here since 2007. Hell, you added a paragraph here (even if you added it with a cite tag rather than a cite), as well as numerous other edits you've performed on other articles, incuding this addition of both material and a supportive citation that you did back in September 2021, and this removal of unused parameters from a template you did that same month, demonstrating that you know enough of the "coding" to add and modify citations. So what knowledge do you need that you haven't already demonstrated? Nightscream (talk) 13:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)


 * You could have just said, "No, I will not add the citations" and saved yourself a lot of time. I added no paragraph to the Joyce DeWitt article. I added a single word. You clearly can't be taken seriously as a person or an editor, so I'll leave you to whatever it is you do. Kubrickrules (talk) 23:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * And you could have just added the citation, which you've done before in other articles. Instead, you ask other people to do it for you for some reason, give false reasons for refusing to do this, and when they provide evidence showing this, you attack the editor who did this, as if the act of doing so makes them wrong rather than you. Apparently "You clearly can't be taken seriously as a person or an editor" is a translated way of saying, "You presented evidence showing that what I said was untrue, and I'm going to attack you because I'm too sore to admit it." Got it, Stanley. I read you loud and clear. Toodles. :-) Nightscream (talk) 14:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, no. What actually happened here is that I added a single word, a geographical location requiring no citation, to a small paragraph I did not write, in an article I did not write. Soon afterwards, the entire paragraph was taken down for lack of citation (not having to do with my edit). Curious as to the validity of the information that was taken down (again, none of it having to do with my edit. I literally only added one word to improve geographical accuracy), I conducted my own search, and found sources for everything that was removed in less than ten seconds. I incorrectly assumed the editor who took the article down actually attempted to source the information necessary for a citation first, but was unsuccessful, hence the take-down. But this was not the case. The information was so innocuous and easily sourced, one can only assume the paragraph was removed more out of spite than anything else. Who knows?
 * Since my overall experience with Wikipedia editors is that they tend to be flaming assholes, I left the citations in the talk section for someone else to use, if they wanted to replace the paragraph. I specifically did not want to return the paragraph myself (didn't dare, more like it), and go through all the trouble of having to Google and/or remember how to add the citations properly (because again, I'm not a skilled editor. I rarely perform this function, and have to do a search on how to do it each time), because inevitably, an angry, childish bully of an editor reverts my edits because they absolutely hate when someone undoes one of their edits or messes with the articles they wrote. I'm tired of aggressive Wikipedia editor bullies, so my plan was to simply provide the citations in the Talk section, and let someone else deal with them. The predictably aggressive bully who eventually showed up did indeed attack me as expected, making this entire experience aggressively unpleasant as usual. There is no fucking way I will edit anything in the Joyce DeWitt article, as there is a 99% chance it will simply be reverted by an aggressive bully. I simply do not have the time or patience to deal with any of it. This article can say whatever it wants to say, be written and given citations by whomever wants to write or citation it, or have paragraphs removed from it for whatever reason, by whomever. I do not care. I'm done here.--Kubrickrules (talk) 23:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)