Talk:One in a Million (1936 film)

Uncited source
When I removed the reference on 25 Feb, my edit summary was "uncited". This means that the standard reference work that you have added is not used to cite any particular material in the article and therefore serves no purpose. Please read Citing sources. It appears that One in a Million is just mentioned on page 64 of Stanley Green's book, so this source is not a standard reference for One in a Million, it is a standard reference for Hollywood Musicals in general. As such, it could be used to provide an inline citation but not included as a general stand-alone reference. It would be useful to pick out some specific information from the source, incorporate it in the article and provide an inline citation. Alternatively you could find some info that is already in the article and tie it in to the source in the same way.

Also, as you are new to Wikipedia, I assume you are not aware of WP:BRD which asserts that it's fine to be Bold, but if someone Reverts your edit, you should then go on to Discuss the issue on the Talk page (which is what I'm attempting to do now) rather than just reverting the revert which can lead to an edit war. Rodney Baggins (talk) 16:13, 10 March 2020 (UTC)


 * As you are an experienced user, I assume that you are aware of WP:DNB. Would it not have been sensible to approach me before making the edit?  It isn't as if my edit was any sort of vandalism or false information.--SvanBueren (talk) 15:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi there, thank you for following my advice and being gracious about my apparent criticism, which certainly wasn't meant as a personal attack, so apologies if it was taken that way. If editors were expected to approach others before reverting any edits, then nothing would move forward. That's why WP:BRD is used. You revert an edit and THEN discuss it (if the originator chooses to challenge your revert), not the other way round. You do have to have a thick skin to work around here and not be offended when someone unexpectedly reverts an edit that you made. As I said before, after being bold and having your edit reverted, the next step in BRD is to open up a discussion on the Talk page if you are in any doubt about why your edit was reverted. It's not advisable to "restore your changes or engage in back-and-forth reverting" as this is not a productive way forward. My mistake was probably that I didn't give specific details about my reasons in the edit summary, given that you are a relative newcomer, but I didn't know that at the time. I'll go in and do some tidying in due course. The Sonja Henie info that you have taken from your source would probably sit better in the lead which is fairly brief anyway, rather than having a separate section down below. Also, as your source now shows up as a citation, it doesn't also need to be a stand-alone source. Looking at your contributions, you're clearly a dedicated cinephile, and it looks as if you took a 5-year break from Wiki-editing. Welcome back to Wikipedia! Regards, Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)