User talk:Doniago/Archive 42

Star Trek: The Next Generation
I removed your notability challenges to the TNG episodes "Time's Arrow" (a two-parter) and "Cause and Effect" because they were the only three TNG episodes (out of 178 total) whose articles were challenged for notability. Perhaps the articles need improvement, but notability is NOT based on degree of article development; it's almost certain that these episodes are notable merely because they're TNG. --RBBrittain (talk) 03:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I also removed your challenge to TOS' "The Tholian Web". Not only is it the only TOS episode out of 79 (80 with pilot) to be challenged, but you gave NO reason for your challenge. While there's plenty of other TOS episodes I could argue to be less notable, it's even easier than TNG to argue *all* TOS episodes are notable. (DS9, Voyager, Enterprise and especially TAS? Maybe. TOS & TNG? No.) --RBBrittain (talk) 03:54, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * One is not required to provide an explanation when challenging notability, and the proper method of dealing with it is to address the concerns by providing sources, as discussed at Talk:The Gamesters of Triskelion. Failing that you could have asked rather than simply removing the tags. In any event, encouraging editors via tagging to improve the articles does no harm and may actually help. I will replace the tags shortly. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 03:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You might also want to take a look at WP:OTHERSTUFF. Notability tags are specific to each article; that any other episode article may satisfy notability concerns is irrelevant to these specific articles; it may in fact be the case that those other articles should be tagged as well. DonIago (talk) 04:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Would you advise me about a proposed article edit?
Hello Doniago. I would like to ask your advice on something. I'm considering making a change to an article. It wouldn't be my first change to an article, but it *would* be the first time I remove material as opposed to adding or slightly altering material. I've started a discussion on the article's talk page. If you have time and if it wouldn't be inconvenient, perhaps you could take a quick look at it and give me your opinion. The discussion is at Talk:Kinescope. As always I appreciate any help or advice you give me. Richard27182 (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It looks like you've already gotten a couple of responses, and I know nothing about the subject matter, so...I'll leave it in their hands. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Jacob K. Javits Convention Center
I don't think "actually" is needed in the lead because "only" very well conveys the point that the convention center is not the largest in the U.S. Epic Genius (talk) 16:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait, I made a mistake there. Please disregard the comment. I was the one that added "actually", then I forgot about that edit. Epic Genius (talk) 16:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I love problems that solve themselves. Thanks! :) DonIago (talk) 16:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:15, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to Boogie Nights
Hey there, I reverted your edit to Boogie Nights as it seems to have added vandalism back into the article. i'm sure that was made in mistake, so no problem. ~NottNott (  ✉  - ☺  ) 15:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, no, actually I think my edit was correct. It's in agreement with a stable version from early May and never in the film is it mentioned that "Dirk Diggler" has any bisexual connotations. Thanks though! Please let me know if you have additional concerns. DonIago (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay then, that's pretty surprising. Why is the edit legitimate then? Penis is a green light for vandalism, I'm interested haha. (written before edit conflict) ~NottNott  (  ✉  - ☺  ) 15:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And that explains everything. Cheers dude! ~NottNott  (  ✉  - ☺  ) 15:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep; it's a movie about a guy with a big...talent. ;) DonIago (talk) 16:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Visual Collaborative
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Visual Collaborative. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Richard27182 needs your help again.
Hi Doniago. Once again I need the help of someone experienced. But this time it's not technical but more like "political." I'm trying to correct an error in an article. I made the appropriate correction, which was promptly reverted. Rather than getting involved in an "editing war," I contacted the reverter and tried to work something out, but to no avail. So I started a discussion on the article's talk page. All I ask of you is to check it out and weigh in with your opinion. The talk page is Talk:Wanderer of the Wasteland (1945 film). Thanks! Richard27182 (talk) 08:01, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Richard, it looks like others have weighed in there, and I know nothing about the subject, so I'll defer to them.
 * Going forward, rather than seeking out individual editors, you might be best off initiating conversations at article Talk pages, and then contacting the appropriate WP:Wikiprojects if necessary to get additional opinions, or considering other forms of dispute resolution. Contacting individual uninvolved editors can come across as canvassing, which is a no-no. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 04:26, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: — Berean Hunter   (talk)
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. 20:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm a little curious as to what prompted this, but in any case: thanks! I promise to use my powers for good. :p DonIago (talk) 04:27, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Waltzing Matilda
Dear Doniago,

I am wondering how the two sources I added for the 2000 olympics ceremony are not reliable? Granted, the blog entry with the playlist might not be ideal, however the video is indisputable evidence of it having happend (Doesn't that fall under the common sense mentioned in the guideline?).

Respectfully Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christian Break (talk • contribs) 17:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Chris. Blogs in general are not reliable because there's no editorial process involved. Additionally, while the video may establish the existence of it, it doesn't establish any significance, which should generally be included when discussing occurrences of an item "in popular culture". Ideally a third-party source should be included which discusses the occurrence of the song on some level rather than merely noting it. Hope this helps, and feel free to take this to the article's Talk page if you don't feel we're seeing eye to eye. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Jurassic Park
There are a couple of edits that I have made which have been reverted due to being erroneous. In which way have I made erroneous edits to the page? Those that I have added were to add detail, and one which coincided with the Cast section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zapablast05 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You were changing Ray Arnold to John Arnold. If nothing else that doesn't agree with the Cast listing or IMDb. DonIago (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Good manners and helpful.

Crazyseiko (talk) 19:38, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 
 * Awww, a kitty cat! Thanks! DonIago (talk) 20:03, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Empire State Building
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Empire State Building. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Handling trivia
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Handling trivia. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
If you have an opinion on this, your comments are requested. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:53, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It looks like the conversation is going okay at this point, especially in light of Betty's comments. I honestly prefer it when opinions are solicited via WT:FILM rather than being contacted directly. As good-natured as the latter may be, it can give the impression of canvassing. In any case, let me know if you feel things are stalling and it might be worthwhile for me to take another look at it. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 12:33, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations
There is an RfC that you may be interested in at Template talk:Infobox country. Please join us and help us to determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:40, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Two cents contributed. :) DonIago (talk) 16:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trivia sections
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trivia sections. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Chicken Dance
Read my edit more carefully. My edit did not rely on the German Wikipedia article, but on the documentation in that article (as my reference makes clear). Any reader could go to that documentation with an additional click.Ajrocke (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Then copy the documentation to the English WP article please. We should not be relying on other WPs, or the documentation within them, for referencing. DonIago (talk) 14:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Richard27182 is asking for your help again
Hi Doniago. I'm asking two or three editors this question. It's an unusual question that I don't think is likely to show up under any of the Wikipedia policies, and I'm hoping you can answer it for me. Suppose I'm considering making a small change to an article. Would it be OK to contact the author of the article (or the author of the section I'm considering modifying) in advance on their own talk page just to run the idea past them and get an idea of what kind of reaction the modification would draw? I don't think this would count as "canvassing" since, if anything, the editor I would be contacting would be more likely to be biased against my point of view since I'd be suggesting modifying something he wrote. The whole purpose would be to try to avoid getting into any more contentious, argumentative battles like the one I'm currently involved in concerning Technicolor terminology.  As always, thank you for your help and advice. Richard27182 (talk) 11:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you should raise the question at the article's Talk page rather than asking specific individuals who may present an opinion that wouldn't reflect consensus. Hope this helps. DonIago (talk) 19:34, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Arcology
Stop deleting the information regarding The Toronto Arcology COOP Project. It IS A real world Arcology project, being worked on by many people and your deleting of this information - prevents it from reaching the public. The proposal we have, is just as valid as all of the other PROPOSED Arcologies the page has on it, and we also have more public information available then any of the existing proposals... Does Crystal Island Exist? No. It doesn't even have a web page, or a group, or anything - its a picture. Our Arcology has a COMMUNITY that we are building, has photos, 3D models, and coop community planning to push this idea into the public eye. Stop interfering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.91.11.250 (talk) 10:47, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You, presumably accidentally, added this to the middle of my Talk page. I'd recommend being more careful in the future, as I might have overlooked your post.
 * Information published on Wikipedia must be verifiable. Please provide a reliable source for your information. Additionally, Wikipedia is not an advertising tool; it is not our job to help you promote your arcology. In fact, you appear to have a conflict of interest, and consequently it would behoove you to discuss any information you wish to add at the article's Talk page prior to adding it. Thank you for your understanding. DonIago (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Noticeboard invitation
You are invited to this noticeboard about that IP user who has been committing edit war on Die Hard. BattleshipMan (talk) 19:07, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I took the liberty of cleaning up your report a bit, hope you don't mind. But yes, the IP is edit-warring and refusing to discuss their edits. DonIago (talk) 19:27, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And ✅. The IP attempting to defend themselves made the report far more entertaining, so thank you for calling my attention to it. :) DonIago (talk) 13:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Rick Springfield edit
Hello. I noticed that you removed my Rick Springfield reference to him starring in the new Meryl Streep picture. However, if you look at the Wiki link to the film page that I included, it clearly lists him in the cast.
 * Hi there, you're welcome to copy the reference used in that article for use in the Rick Springfield article. Per WP:CIRCULAR please do not just link to the film article. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 19:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)