User talk:Doniago/Archive 64

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) 12:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

The Aviator
Hey Don, i see you removed my pertinent and correct edit on The Aviator page, well now i just want to say to you this: F-U-C-K Y-O-U!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.16.186.90 (talk) 19:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Soylent Green
I have only reduced Soylent Green from 761 words to less than 700 according to Wikipedia policy (400-700 words) So who is saying that I am edit warring?Arderich (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * To me it looked like a back and forth there, and given that you were already blocked for edit-warring quite recently I'd think you'd want to avoid even the appearance of such. If nothing else you're already disregarding WP:BRD, which while only an essay tends to carry a great deal of weight around here. I would urge you to discuss the situation at the article's Talk page rather than continuing the current situation.
 * If you feel the other person is also edit-warring, there's nothing stopping you from warning them (I didn't look that closely to see if you were reverted by one or multiple editors), but I think it would be dubious to do that while reverting them under the current circumstances.
 * In any case, adherence to WP:FILMPLOT (which is a guideline, not a policy, and therefore carries less weight) isn't a viable defense for edit-warring unless you could somehow prove you were operating in good faith and the other party was solely being disruptive, but your own block casts a large shadow on that.
 * If there's anything I can do to help, I'm happy to do so, but I can't do anything to help if you keep editing to push your own changes without an attempt at dialog. DonIago (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2017 (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. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alone in the Universe
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alone in the Universe. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Steve Englehart
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Steve Englehart. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Scream 2
Okay In reference to my SCREAM 2 page update Please go the Varese Sarabande Records site. In their club section the new CD I referenced is still in print. How can I cite this for the article. There is no direct link (that I can see) to paste into the wiki.

Please research and advise.

Thank you 😊 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeviantMan (talk • contribs)
 * Please see WP:CITE for information as to how to insert a citation. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 14:54, 17 April 2017 (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. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:04, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, maybe let's try a different approach to User:USN1977
You have like six warnings on his talk page, getting fiercer and fiercer. Maybe this is not the best approach for this editor? There's more than one way to skin a cat, and you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (I nothing if not full of platitudes). I gave the guy a welcome message and am trying to engage him on a peer-to-peer basis, would appreciate your support. Pinging User:Binksternet who has also templated this user.

The user came on board in 2006 (!) and is still active, as he just made an edit to an article I was watching -- an edit which was not terrible or completely unreasonable, but which was trivia, unreferenced, and didn't really belong in that article anyway. But he wants to contribute. He is not a vandal. He has 4,500 edits. But he appears not to be growing as an editor.

It's an interesting case. Of all the contributions to his talk page, two are by him; one is a test and other is a single word. He has one or two posts on user talk pages. However, he has posted to article talk pages a bit.

We need to get this person to engage. It'd be an interesting exercise to see if we can get him to do that, and also maybe figure out if we can find places to point him to. I don't know as I've seen a case quite like this.

You want to be an admin, right? Well here is a chance for Doniago, Captain of Wikipedia, to show his quality. Herostratus (talk) 04:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned at USN's Talk page, I don't believe I've interacted with the user for over five months, so I'm not really sure why I'm suddenly getting brought into this? If that sounds defensive, I don't mean it to be, I'm just a bit confused, since I think it could reasonably be said that we've had no recent interaction. But I'm happy to offer my perspective and do what I can to prevent things from escalating further.
 * When an editor doesn't acknowledge messages at their Talk page, I tend to assume for better or worse that it's because they don't want to discuss the matter. If they then continue with the same behavior, to my mind, an escalated warning is then typically appropriate.
 * FWIW, I (probably) wouldn't give an escalated warning for a different type of offense. For instance, if I'm warning someone about bloating plot summaries, and then they start adding unsourced material, that's two separate issues. The amount of time between offenses may also be an issue. Obviously, I'm left exercising my own judgment as to what's appropriate most of the time.
 * I'm happy to lend support, but as I said, it's been awhile since we had any interaction (that I'm aware of), and in the end, if USN continues to engage in disruptive editing while also refusing to engage in discussion...there's not much we can do short of escalation. One reason for blocks is precisely to make it clear to regularly disruptive users (I'm not making that argument for USN) that the disruption needs to stop and they need to engage with their fellow editors, not simply blow off their own Talk pages.
 * Anyway, if there's something in particular you'd like me to do, I'm open to hearing it. Have they been invited to the WP:TEAHOUSE? Cheers! DonIago (talk) 04:54, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I don't really have an action item or anything. Just a heads up on an unusual case, and let's see what develops -- probably nothing, if the user won't start to engage. Herostratus (talk) 03:17, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, my concerns about their past editing notwithstanding, I do hope they'll engage. It would be the best option for all parties, I think. DonIago (talk) 05:23, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:First Interstate Center
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:First Interstate Center. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Volunteer Roll Call
This is a volunteer roll call sent to you on behalf of the current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Coordinator, Robert McClenon, and is being sent to you because you have listed yourself as a volunteer at DRN. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to the roll call list. Those who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after May 31, 2017 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after May 31, 2017, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.

Best regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 21:54, 27 April 2017 (UTC)  (Not watching this page)

Please comment on Talk:Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

TiMER
Hi, I am responding to this comment you left on my talk page: Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the Timer (film) plot summary have been removed because they added a significant amount of unnecessary detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! DonIago (talk) 02:49, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

First, I would like to suggest that if you remove edits that other people make from pages and direct them here for discussion, you should make it clear where on this page the person should respond. I know I should probably spend longer reading this talk page and figure out the right way to make this fit in, maybe by making a heading, but please excuse me for not spending the additional time ... :-|

I have seen articles about how wikipedia is edited by only a subset of the population. I can tell that you are working hard to keep wikipedia clean and useful so are dedicated to it being better. Being open to conversation by at least making it clear where to converse could increase wikipedia's general friendliness and help ameliorate the selection bias problem.

As for my specific edits to the TiMER page: well, I am not gonna argue about a rom com page, that's ok. But I am confused, because the page has a header on it which I'll copy here: "This article consists almost entirely of a plot summary. It should be expanded to provide more balanced coverage that includes real-world context. Please edit the article to focus on discussing the work rather than merely reiterating the plot. (July 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)" However the article is entirely re-iterated plot, and what I added was (intended to) be more balanced and add real-world context.

Frankly I think most of the wikipedia plot summaries are sad, in that they take all the art out of a film. By adding the charming younger-character subplot and commenting on how it fit with the larger story I was trying to follow the instructions quoted above.

Again, I'll say thank you for all the work you do to make wikipedia useful. I do not edit wikipedia very much and was trying to make a small contribution to make it better.

[edit] I did go back and tried harder to edit the page, keeping words to a minimum and keeping out extra details, while focusing on the important pieces of plot. I did not put the young people's subplot back in (i figure it's in the history, so you could do that if you wanted to.)

Thanks for moving this section to the bottom, that makes sense.

Krobin (talk) 04:13, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Krobin, it's general practice that new threads be placed at the bottom of Talk pages unless explicitly indicated otherwise (rare cases). No worries; moving it was effortless.
 * As you noted, the edits you made were strictly to the Plot section. The header, though, is referring to the article needing real-world context. How well the film was reviewed, behind-the-scenes info, when/how it was released on home media, etc. You might look at MOS:FILM or other film articles for other ideas as to how the article can be expanded (assuming reliable sources have discussed any of it; I'm not sure how much coverage this relatively small production attracted). Expanding the plot in particular is problematic, as we have a guideline that film summries should not exceed 700 words without good reason, and I don't think this particular film merits an exception; if you feel otherwise, I'd invite you to start a discussion at the talk page for the film itself.
 * Hope this helps, and thanks for reaching out to me! Happy to talk further if you'd like! DonIago (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

oh hahaha - thanks for the clarification! Yeah, I thought that the section I quoted was in Plot (oops) and that "real-world context" was things like why different pieces were included.

It sounds like the dry style of plot summary that I don't like is just the wikipedia style, and if so I'm not going to argue that the whole wikipedia needs to change.

thanks for your comments.

Krobin (talk) 04:32, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I'm afraid if you're looking for colorful plot summaries you'll want to look elsewhere. I used to go to http://www.themoviespoiler.com/, but it's been awhile. Around here the goal is pretty much to just give readers a blow-by-blow of the most critical parts of the summary. For better or worse, a lot of my time is spent trying to bring summaries down to reasonable word counts.
 * Hope you're stick around, but understand if this isn't quite your cup of tea! DonIago (talk) 04:34, 5 May 2017 (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. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Ghost Ship
The reason I made that edit in Ghost Ship (2002 film) because it never mentioned Karl Urban's character's death in the plot summary, like the other characters's deaths were mentioned. I thought you should know that. BattleshipMan (talk) 03:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but plot summaries are normally described in the present tense, and the sentence as you wrote it appears to be a random addition. What are the circumstances that lead to his death, for instance? DonIago (talk) 15:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I only vaugely remember the movie. I think Urban was trying to pump out the water in the flooded room of the haunted cruised ship where he got dragged by unseen forces into the ship's gear which lead him to his death. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've never seen it myself. I think your concern about the character's death not being mentioned may be valid, but might I suggest instead asking at the Talk page whether anyone with a better recollection of the film could add the pertinent information? DonIago (talk) 02:18, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll give it a shot. BattleshipMan (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

American Jewish Anti-Bolshevism
Thank you for restoring the content. I'm sorry that I removed it. I've been desperately trying to edit the page to save it since it has been proposed for deletion. I've been trying to edit anything out that might seem like personal opinion or that makes that article appear to be original research and synthesis. Do you have any advice?

Sorry for any inconvenience! Elimnist56 (talk) 14:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * At the risk of being snarky, my first advice would be that new Talk page threads should generally be placed at the bottom of the page, not the top. :p DonIago (talk) 16:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting in touch! I assume you're referring to American Jewish Anti-Bolshevism during the Russian Revolution? If so, I'd definitely be concerned that so much of the article is referenced to so few sources. Additionally the editor who proposed the article for deletion voiced concerns that the article violates copyright, which is a really big deal and, if true, should be resolved ASAP. Hope this helps as a starting point. DonIago (talk) 16:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Torupill
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Torupill. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 June 2017 (UTC)