User talk:Doniago

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pinocchio (1940 film) § Plot. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain
I believe the ref. included is valid, in that it provides a more rounded explanation, extra source. It also avoids a disharmony with the separate Wikipedia page for the song and it's meaning. I disagree that it is unconstructive, removing it seems to me unhelpful for future readers.

Chien-ShiungWu (talk) 14:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you're referring to; the only thing I took issue with was your changing "gay" to "Gay", which isn't even consistent with how its capitalized at Gay. I think I may have reverted anther edit of yours accidentally, but I also un-reverted that. DonIago (talk) 14:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The Bourne Identity
Hi, I just wanted to say that I re-added the note on The Bourne Identity with proper citation. Apologies for the oversight. TheAlderaanian (talk)
 * No problem! You might want to look at the article text as well (I'm about to step away from my PC for a bit, but if you'd rather I take a look, reply here); I think it mentions the same info you added, but it's worded differently and potentially inconsistently to what you added. Cheers!

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Intichkanmi7378
Working on their edits, I've only now discovered how much you've done about them. Much appreciated and a bit embarrassing given my ANI report. I hope you read what I added to their talk page. Doug Weller talk 08:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I think we have a problem. One of my removals of Wiktionary was reverted as there was a source. Looking at and clicking on the Wiktionary entry I found   Doug Weller  talk 10:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not our job to confirm that every one of the dozens of Wiktionary links that Intich added to articles in turn has a source. If you or anyone else wants to do so, you're of course welcome to, but I don't have the time or inclination to dig into it. Intich still hasn't edited lately, but if/when they return, hopefully they can/will do the work they should have done in the first place. DonIago (talk) 12:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I totally agree. I also think that even if there is a source in Wiktionary we should use, once verified, the source itself, we still can't trust Wiktionary. I don't think I should have been reverted. Sorry, meant to say this earlier but got distracted with a futile search for the Paracas Candelabra which I know exists but can't find, probably in Spanish. Doug Weller  talk 13:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Right. As I said in my first message to Intich, using reliable sources that Wiktionary uses is fine, but merely citing Wiktionary is entirely unacceptable; if nothing else, the Wiktionary page could change in the future. I'm not sure what instance of you being reverted you're referring to; I didn't see that in either diff you included here? DonIago (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I explained the issue to the person who reverted me and they agreed we shouldn't use it. A few more minutes and I hope they will all be cleaned up. Let's hope when they return they have listened. Doug Weller  talk 13:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Scatman Crothers revision
Thank you for the message response. I actually did not add the initial uncredited TV show reference to either the "Wonderful World of Disney" or "The Lorax" television shows. As they were already present when I began editing the page, I assumed that they were already confirmed and merely researched the identity of the episodes (season, number, and title) in question. As of now, I do not know who added the two shows to the Television filmography "table" or when they were added. I just saw them and sought out the episode information to complete the list. Take care and be well. Lime green k (talk) 05:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads-up. Happy editing! DonIago (talk) 12:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)