User talk:Film Blog 101/Archive 1

COI tags
Please see WP:COS - "You should not create or edit articles about yourself... If you or they are notable enough, someone else will create the article." Number  5  7  17:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: James Saldaña
Further to my own talk page, you should probably have a look at WP:GNG. Simply adding directory listings and showing times for the subject's film really doesn't count as "significant" coverage of the subject. You really only need one or two references per claim. 26 references for a 4-line biography is just silly and tends to suggest you know they don't provide significant coverage. It certainly doesn't add much by way of verification to have 3 references (that aren't independent) to support a single minor claim. Stalwart 111  08:02, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of James Saldaña for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Saldaña is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/James Saldaña until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Stalwart 111  01:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

You need to stop.
Seriously. You're going to get yourself blocked. You were given an opportunity to make a cogent argument at Articles for deletion/Our Road To Kosovo to build consensus and convince others that the article should be kept. At the same time, I raised concerns about the notability of James Saldaña. You suggested my view of his notability (or not) was extreme so rather than get into a dispute about it I took it to the community at Articles for deletion/James Saldaña.

Rather than defend either article with rational arguments demonstrated notability against one or Wikipedia's criteria or significant coverage in reliable sources per Wikipedia's key inclusion criteria (WP:GNG) you've taken to attacking other editors, even accusing one editor of racism and a "conflict of interest" (which has a very clear definition at WP:COI; nothing along the lines of what you are suggesting). You need to stop. Israeli/Palestinian politics is covered by ArbCom sanctions (the highest level of community oversight) and I would venture to suggest that your little rant is more than enough to get you blocked.

At the moment, you're the only person arguing that either article should be kept. Getting yourself blocked for posting stupid, offensive rants multiple times into both discussions (and onto my talk page) is only going to guarantee that the one person trying to "defend" the articles will disappear. You'll have only yourself to blame.

I'll quite happily refer you to WP:ANI where they'll likely take a dim view of your behaviour to date. I strongly urge you to remove that completely unfounded accusation and personal attack from both discussions (I'll remove it from my talk page for you). I thought about taking this there without leaving you this note first but thought you should get some warning.

For the record, your argument that guidelines should be ignored because "that's not how they establish notability in the film industry" won't get you far. This isn't a film industry blog or even a film industry wiki. Nor it is IMDB. We have fairly well-established guidelines, including for film-makers and editors aren't likely to ignore those just because you want to impose your own definitions of "notable". Stalwart 111  21:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok I'll remove it but that's not what I meant. Film Blog 101 (talk) 15:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Stalwart After re-reading what I wrote. I did not accuse anyone of anything. The reference to the COI was in the form a question. But I guess I can see how that could be interpreted another way. Please note that I deleted all of the conversations that you referenced. Let me know if I missed anything. Film Blog 101 (talk) 16:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, removing your own comments was a good start. Removing other people's comments from your own talk page can be frowned upon but in this instance I think Number 57 will probably see the sensible side of that decision. It's doesn't matter if a personal attack is in the form of a question, it doesn't contribute much to a discussion and it certainly won't help you build consensus among your fellow editors. I won't comment on the content of your comment - let's just leave it alone and discuss things in a civil manner. Stalwart 111  21:33, 14 March 2014 (UTC)