User talk:Doniago/Archive 80

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) 11:37, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! DonIago (talk) 16:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Total Recall (1990) edits
I got your comment on my edits. I can edit down my changes, but the original summary for the movie had significant number of plot points that were incorrect.

It would have been nice if you first contacted me and suggested that I provide more of a summary as per Wiki guidelines instead of reverting all of my work. The original read like the person who did the summary didn't actually watch the movie at all.Aspenguy2 (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Aspenguy, your work is saved in the article's history page, so nothing's been lost, and WP:FILMPLOT is generally considered a bright-line guideline. You're welcome to reinsert your edits, but you'll need to make other changes to keep the article within the guideline, and I don't personally feel TR is a complicated enough film to merit disregarding the guideline. Alternately you're welcome to start a conversation at the article's Talk page to ask how other editors feel about the length of the summary, if you don't feel it's possible to both provide a good summary of the film and keep it under 700 words. Thanks for reaching out to me with your concerns. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm going to work on a more concisely worded plot summary. I'll use Word to monitor my word count and get it within the guidelines. Yes, I realize it's not lost, poor choice of words on my part. Aspenguy2 (talk) 20:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Please let me know if there's anything I can do to assist. DonIago (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Wow, after a few hours work, I've got it down to 700 words. If you could review it and give me your opinion whether it meets Wiki standards, I'd appreciate it. How would I get you a copy for review? Aspenguy2 (talk) 19:36, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Assuming you haven't already done so (today has been nuts for me), I'd say just go ahead and post it to the article assuming it's not a radical change. If other editors have a problem with it, they'll revert you, and ideally at that point you can work through their concerns at the article's Talk page. If it is a radical change, maybe post it to the Talk page first and see what others think. I don't own the article, and it won't matter whether I like your summary if other editors don't care for it. Thanks for your work on improving it though! :) DonIago (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

After reading the talk page on Total Recall, I decided to update the already available text instead of trying to introduce a totally new summary. This way I won't get into a back-and-forth on replacing something that is already agreed upon, except for errors in the existing text. I put the updated summary into the talk page to see if people agree/disagree with the changes I made. Aspenguy2 (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your efforts to improve the article, for coming to me with your concerns, and for your civility throughout this discussion! I realize the last point shouldn't really be necessary, but if you've spent any significant amount of time here...yeah. Happy editing! DonIago (talk) 16:07, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I think being polite and civil contributes to a more meaningful discussion and allows people to compromise on their point of view.Aspenguy2 (talk) 13:08, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It's a shame that doesn't seem to be a more commonly-held belief! DonIago (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:One Piece
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:One Piece. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Quite welcome, and thank you! Happy editing! DonIago (talk) 20:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mindhunter (TV series)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mindhunter (TV series). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Where the Wild Things Are
Hi, Doniago! :) Regarding my edit to the WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE page, I tried to add a link but it wasn't accepted; the link was to the publisher's page for the book mentioned (my Latin translation of the book); is that not allowed? I don't know how otherwise to verify that a book exists. Thank you for your advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lafleur922 (talk • contribs)
 * Were you posting the link as a citation? If not, that's probably the issue; generally external links shouldn't be simply pasted into articles. DonIago (talk) 01:55, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

List of natural horror films reversion
Why would a list of films by subject need a "reliable source?" Is not the wikipedia article for the film itself a reliable source? A film listed under Bees, you click on the link, and, yep, its a film about bees. It's just screwy. Does the page for the filmography of Alfred Hitchcock require a reliable source on each link to confirm it is a film by Hitchcock? This is why I rarely contribute to Wikipedia anymore. Not even correcting grammar is worth bothering. Tpellman (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources per WP:CIRCULAR, though hopefully you could find an appropriate reference within the linked article which could then be copied back to the list. All list articles need sources for the entries on the list to confirm that they belong on that list, and thus in this case we need evidence that the films in question have been considered "natural horror films". With regards to this specific list, we did in fact have numerous entries on the list that were not considered natural horror films, which partly motivated the decision to adhere more strictly to what policy already states about such things, WP:LISTVERIFY for reference. Sorry if you find our desire to ensure that list entries can be readily verified frustrating. DonIago (talk) 02:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

How to put a "Summary needs improvement banner" on an article?
Hi, I'm looking for some help. I've come across 2 move summaries - The Wrath of Kan (743 words) and Pleasantville (960) words. I've seen on other articles where they put a "banner" which states that a section needs improvement. Both of these exceed the 400-700 summary word limit guidelines. Is there a procedure for putting the banner notice to say that the section needs improvement?

Thanks for your assistance.Aspenguy2 (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you looking for Template:Long plot? Cheers. DonIago (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I added this to Pleasantville. Can you look at it and tell me if it looks OK?Aspenguy2 (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You should put it right under the Plot section header, so right now it's not in the right place. :) DonIago (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Much appreciated. Best regards.Aspenguy2 (talk) 20:10, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Is there a single page which lists all of these options? I'm a "newbie" with Wiki editing. Again, thanks for your assistance.Aspenguy2 (talk) 20:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If you go to the WP page for the template itself it'll show you the options for using it, if that's what you mean? Hope this helps! DonIago (talk) 01:55, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah, now I can be more succinct in my question. Where do I find a comprehensive list of ALL templates? Thanks.Aspenguy2 (talk) 12:11, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd start with Template messages and work outward from there. :) DonIago (talk) 13:23, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, that is what I'm looking for. Thanks again for your help and patience with a "newbie" editor!Aspenguy2 (talk) 13:45, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome. Glad I could help! BTW, generally when engaging in a message thread, you should indent reponses, which you can do by prefacing your response with a colon. So, the way this would ideally look is:

Message 1
 * Message 2
 * Message 3
 * Message 4
 * Message 5
 * and so forth. There's Template:OD which can be used if there's so many indents that reading is becoming unwieldy. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 13:48, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Visual arts
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Visual arts. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Neo-noir film
List of neo-noir is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_neo-noir_titles The Unbeholden (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to update the articles with some sourced text in order to support the neo-noir categorization, but per WP:CATV you cannot just add the categories to the articles if the articles do not themselves reference anything to support the categories. Thank you for your understanding. DonIago (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

American Pie (Song)
You wrote: "I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, American Pie (song), 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."

My edit referred to the parody written by my wife, which I think others will enjoy knowing about. It was performed at our seder on April 20 2008. The reference is a youtube link that was published 3 days later. [From the YT page: "Published on Apr 23, 2008"]Miss my warm apple pie What documentation are you looking for, that it was performed on that date? (personal testimony?) ... that it was written by her? I'll be happy to provide anything that is possible to do. Thanks for considering. --192.4.8.170 (talk) 19:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Murray Spiegel — Preceding comment added by 192.4.8.170 (talk • contribs)
 * You need to provide evidence that this parody is considered significant in some manner, as discussed at WP:IPCV. For "in popular culture" material we need a source that proves not just that the reference exists, but that it attracted notice. Or as I like to put it, we need a source that establishes not just that the tree fell in the woods, but that it made a sound when it fell. From your description, I'm unfortunately doubtful that your wife's parody will meet that requirement, but if others discussed it in a meaningful manner, that's awesome! DonIago (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Aha. I was looking into Verifiability for how the video can be a source of information about (our|them)selves [as there wouldn't be reasonable doubt as to its authenticity, doesn't involve 3rd parties, etc]. Instead, the objection pertains to significance, which is an entirely different ball of wax. We'll have to get someone famous to write us up! (We've had stories on PBS and the NY Times, but unfortunately, not regarding this specific parody.) Thanks for taking the time.-192.4.8.170 (talk) 19:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)Murray Spiegel
 * No problem. Thanks for approaching me in a calm and civil manner regarding your concerns! Perhaps such thanks shouldn't be necessary, but I've had some pretty dubious interactions in my time here, heh. Two suggestions going forward, generally speaking: 1) when leaving posts on Talk pages, please sign your posts by adding four tildes (~) to the end of them. 2) Typically in conversation threads, it's best to indent responses, which can be done by prefacing your text with one or more colons . Cheers! DonIago (talk) 19:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Budy cop films
Your message for me:

"Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Buddy cop film, 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. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I didn't see anything at the linked article that referred to it being a buddy cop film. DonIago (talk) 15:15, 19 August 2019 (UTC)"

I don’t know what the reliable source should be to confirm this, I indicated the Wikipedia article about this movie. Here this film with English subtitles: https://sovietmoviesonline.com/crime-films/103-mesto-vstrechi-izmenit-nelzya.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashafromdonetsk (talk • contribs) 17:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd recommend checking AFI, BFI, or possibly Allmovie, as starting points. Regardless, ideally any time we're stating that a film is of X genre we should have a source supporting such a statement. There's been some discussion of this at the MOS:FILM talk page recently, actually. Hope this is helpful! DonIago (talk) 03:04, 20 August 2019 (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) 01:31, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Minas Morgul
Hi Doniago, many thanks for your message. I'll now add a revised script, with a citation, which I hope will be acceptable. Regards,Jungleboy63 (talk) 10:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for working to improve the article! Cheers! DonIago (talk) 15:47, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Blade Runner
Blade Runner is arguably a neo-noir film. You disagree, fine; or you think that assertion should be sourced- I agree! But it isn't vandalism to add it to the article. Killer Chihuahua 18:29, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Is this a response to my filing at AIV? I'm happy to go to WP:3RN instead but given the editor in question was prevously blocked precisely because of edits to this article I was hoping that more formal process wouldn't be needed. Thanks for clarifying! DonIago (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Nevermind; was able to track down the AIV resolution. I guess I'll open a case at 3RN if they try to push their edit again, which I suspect they will. As noted above, I was hoping to avoid that process given the IP was blocked for edits to exactly this article previously. Thanks anyhow. DonIago (talk) 18:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Midsommar (film), as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". ''A genre change in the lead is generally not a minor change. In addition, the genre you added does not appear to be supported by the sources in the article.'' – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Knight Rider entry
Greetings. I read your post on my talk page about not sourcing my entry on Knight Rider from the video game The Operative: No One Lives Forever. Your talk page had a link to the Wikipedia:Verifiability page. On it it states under the "What counts as a reliable source" section can include the piece of work itself. The video game is the piece of work that the information came from. I understand referencing a piece of published work such as an article, but how would one source a visual reference? I didn't think adding a screen shot from the video game would be necessary. Any suggestions? Thanks. --CKStark (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please note that my message at your talk page also encouraged you to review WP:IPCV. "In popular culture"-style information must be accompanied by a source that not only establishes the existence of the reference, but also that it was considered significant in some manner. Or as I like to put it, we need to establish not only that the tree fell in the woods, but that it made a sound when it fell. Or in this case, it's not enough to say the video game referenced Knight Rider, we need a source to have commented upon it. Thanks for coming to me with your concerns, and I hope this explanation is helpful! DonIago (talk) 03:10, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

September 2019
Hi Doniago! I got your comment re: Wes Bentley. I cited IMDB because it was the only place I could find (quickly) that mentioned his attendance at Mountain Home High School, but I added it because I went to MHHS and was in band with him! (I didn't add that to IMDB -- it was there when I looked at it.) I'm still relatively new to Wikipedia editing; is there a way to add information with a non-online source? He's in my yearbook....?

Liznorell (talk) 15:13, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Liz, please take a look at WP:RS, which discusses reliable sources in far more detail than I can do here. :) Sources don't need to be online, but they do need to be a source that anyone could theoretically access. I don't think a yearbook would cut it unless it's available through libraries or such. You may also want to take a look at WP:V, which goes into more detail as to what constitutes verifiability. Welcome, and happy editing! DonIago (talk) 15:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cultural impact of the Beatles
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cultural impact of the Beatles. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 8 October 2019 (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) 11:51, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Neutral notice
This is a neutral notice to all registered editors who have contributed to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film over the past year (Sept. 15, 2018-present) that a Request for Comment has been posted here. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)