User talk:Diademchild

Short descriptions
Hi, "retired" and "former" shouldnt be included into the short description per WP:SDAVOID --FMSky (talk) 21:57, 2 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @FMSky Hiya, wow I have just realised this! Thank you for reminding me. Diademchild (talk) 22:10, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Another thing: for people, short descriptions should indicate what they are known for. Footballers like Samuel Eto'o, Yaya Touré, Kolo Touré, Cesc Fàbregas are primarily known for having played football, not for coaching or other activities. See WP:SDEXAMPLES. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 10:12, 4 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @Robby.is.on I see, so the short description doesn't necessarily have to state or indicate what their latest occupation is now. Thanks a lot! Diademchild (talk) 11:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Exactly. :-) When readers search for an article, the short description should help them decide whether they've found the one they're looking for. Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 13:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Ages of BLP subjects
FYI - Subjects of BLP articles are not a reliable source for their own age unless there is other confirming evidence. I'm sure you can work out why that is - people, especially in the entertainment field, regularly make themselves out to be younger than they are. Obviously, in most cases this is not the case, they're simply telling the truth - but we cannot take their own word for it without other evidence. Black Kite (talk) 17:43, 27 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @Black Kite Hiya, thanks for your comment. Is there any particular BLP article subject you were referring to here? Diademchild (talk) 17:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Sabrina Dhowre and her Instagram. I would be very surprised if there wasn't a reliable source out there for her age apart from herself though. Black Kite (talk) 17:56, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Black Kite Oh I see! So does the website "Famous Birthdays" count as a reliable source out there for the D.O.B.'s of subjects of BLP articles? Because her age on there, correlates with what she posted on her Instagram page. Diademchild (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No, and that's the problem. Per Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources, you can't use that source at all, because it's blocked for unreliability. Black Kite (talk) 18:11, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Black Kite But she openly said she was turning 35 this year (in June 2023) in an online interview, which again correlates with what she posted on Instagram. Surely she wouldn't be lying about that, so isn't that pretty much public knowledge? Diademchild (talk) 18:16, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh no, I agree, she's almost certainly not lying. But we still need secondary sources for BLP information. Black Kite (talk) 18:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Black Kite No worries. I just find it funny how I have seen a couple subjects of BLP articles on Wikipedia particularly in the entertainment sector, have their real age verified on Wikipedia by what they would have posted on their birthday previously on Instagram. Diademchild (talk) 18:26, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sure there are plenty out there like that, but they shouldn't be. Black Kite (talk) 18:48, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Paulpat99 (talk) 07:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)


 * @Paulpat99 Oh my apologies. As a fellow colleague on Wikipedia, I shall take your feedback on board. ;-) Diademchild (talk) 12:08, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Happy Editing Paulpat99 (talk) 06:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

April 2024
Hello, I'm Magnolia677. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fresh and Fit Podcast, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:04, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hiya; I hope you're fine. Indeed, I did add content to this page but I didn't provide references as the references are linked to various videos on the podcast's YouTube channel. So I think you made a mistake in reverting my changes; but I will probably look to reinstate the changes I previously made, later on if that is alright with you. Happy editing. Diademchild (talk) 21:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If you add your changes back again without a reliable source, I will revert them and add another warning to your talk page. Please note that Wikipedia does not accept unsourced content or original research. Thanks for your understanding. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Editing
My person, is there a reason you only use extremely vague edit summaries? They don't really explain anything and make it difficult to understand what was done for others without viewing each edit. A type of cabinet (talk) 23:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Hiya, I hope you're fine. Well I mostly edit the "Article Descriptions" of article pages. But I admit that sometimes laziness can play a part in giving vague edit summaries so if you are bothered about it, I do apologise about that. Diademchild (talk) 09:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Doug Weller talk 08:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries redux - "corrected punctuation #article-section-source-editor" is useless
What does that mean? It's worse than vague. Doug Weller talk 08:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Birth dates on biographies of living people
Hello, you reverted one of my edits recently which is how I came across your account for the first time. I notice you seem to spend a lot of your time adding birth dates to articles, primarily to the short descriptions. I would suggest you make sure you're familiar with Wikipedia policies relevant to these areas, as you may not be aware, but some of your additions would appear to go against these guidelines.

WP:BLP, specifically WP:DOB and WP:BLPPRIMARY. When a date of birth is added to an article it must be reliably sourced. WP:PRS details the acceptability or otherwise of many commonly-used sources. You can use a verified social media account of an article subject saying about themselves something along the lines of "today is my 50th birthday" if there is no reason to doubt it.

WP:SHORTDESC, specifically WP:SDDATES. It is helpful when you add, say '1820-1882' to the short description of a historical figure, but it is less helpful when you add birthdates for living people. They must be properly sourced within the article in order to be added. (Personally I think even then they usually don't need to be added because they make the short description longer without adding real information, but as long as you're working within the guidelines I can't stop you there).

I hope you find the information in these documents useful and can take them on board going forward. Best regards JustAnotherCompanion (talk) 23:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Hiya, I hope you're doing fine. Yes, I predominantly spend most of my time adding birthdates to articles of subjects, and the date of birth I provided for one of your recent subject's article is authentic, so I have now reverted your previous change and have included a reliable source in support of that subject's current age. Now regarding short descriptions, I authentically add birthdates for living people especially if their birthdate has genuinely been confirmed, just to keep up with the overall standard across articles of living subjects; so I would never deliberately violate any article description rules. Moreover, thank you for your informational support, as I aim to become a better and respected Wikipedian. Happy editing! Diademchild (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I see you've added an inline reference to the Myleene Klass article now (and it looks like Klass could have made social media posts that could also be used as references), so you'll no doubt be happy to know I won't be removing this information again. It's really important that all birthdays you add (to an article or a short description) are supported like that, so I hope you keep it up. I won't intentionally 'follow' you around Wikipedia, but there's every chance our paths may cross again, and as long as you're working as you've done with Myleene Klass, and keep to the WP guidelines I've shared above, I'll be able to keep my finger off the backspace key :) best regards JustAnotherCompanion (talk) 21:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)