User talk:Joeyconnick/Archive 7

Troye Sivan
Hi there, Sivan is still a citizen of South Africa, despite a beginning his career and residing in Australia. He's mentioned it in a number of interviews. People can be dual citizens, it doesn't make him any less Australian. Can we stick to the facts here?
 * And we are sticking to the facts... but his notability began in Australia, so per MOS:OPENPARABIO, we have Context (location, nationality, etc.) for [my emphasis]. Foregrounding his South African citizenship in the lead is WP:UNDUE as it has nothing to do with his notability. It's fine to mention in the infobox and in the article body (because unlink what you imply, I am not against facts) but it's inappropriate to highlight in the lead. —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:01, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Sincereduck
This editor seems be to be slowly edit warring as they continue add unnecessary genres that the series barely touches on The Boys repeatedly after you, several other editors, and I reverted Sincereduck's edits. — Young Forever (talk)   21:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Portals
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_premiers_of_British_Columbia&oldid=prev&diff=1038663115 I actually made a similar edit before that and then saw this in another article and applied it here. Let me correctly apply it in both locations. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:09, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It float right if it sandwiches the following section: that's why there's . Please revert. —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:27, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:EASTER
FYI, please see Wikipedia talk:Piped link, which means this is not a WP:EASTER infraction. Hwy43 (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah that's one other random editor's opinion that agrees with yours. Hardly a reason to ignore our guidelines. —Joeyconnick (talk) 21:54, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:EASTER has an RFC
WP:EASTER has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Hwy43 (talk) 00:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Trick (1999 film)
I put the matter in here. Please join the discuss. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Trick_%281999_film%29 -  Marychan41   (♔ ♕) 13:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Canadian federal elections & provincial/territorial elections
Howdy. We no longer bother having (formerly the Xth election) in the intros of those articles. GoodDay (talk) 18:23, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Is there a discussion on this you can point me to? —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:26, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * They've been gradually phased out, over the years. But, if you think they should be added in every single federal & provincial/territorial election articles? I'd recommend you bring it up at the talkpage of WP:CANADA. -- GoodDay (talk) 20:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Uhm no, I wouldn't need to go to the Canada project to get it added to "every single" article because it already exists in many of them and you're the one making the change. Really you should be going there and saying, "Do we still want these?" Also, some articles not having something does not mean it needs to be either removed added to articles of the same general type. Consistency is not a requirement or else nothing at Wikipedia would ever change. All that's to say, the onus is on, per WP:STATUSQUO, not someone saying "hey let's keep these." You're making the change, so you need to be able to justify it. "other stuff [doesn't] exist" is not a good enough argument in and of itself, especially since you've been reverted. —Joeyconnick (talk) 04:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * If you won't ask at WP:CANADA? then I will. GoodDay (talk) 05:26, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Did you intend to change "single" to "the Qu"?
Hi, this change has modified three occurrences of the word "single" to "the Qu". Was that intentional? I think it might have been a mistake (perhaps you were referring to Quebec elsewhere in the article), but maybe you intended some discussion of quotas. If that's what you intended, you might need to add an explanation of what you mean by Qu.

Thanks

Paul Foxworthy (talk) 04:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah no that's clearly an error that crept in during the restore. I've fixed it. —Joeyconnick (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks Joey Paul Foxworthy (talk) 01:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing it out! —Joeyconnick (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Deputy Premier of British Columbia
I'm confused as to what you're objecting to with the colour coding over at Deputy Premier of British Columbia. You cite MOS:COLOR, but I don't what it violates; the relevant guideline is to which is something I admittedly ran afoul of the first go, but that I subsequently rectified by including a column that spells out party affiliation. So what's the violation? — Kawnhr (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You're massively violating contrast requirements with white on coloured text, per Some readers of Wikipedia are partially or fully color-blind or visually impaired. Ensure the contrast of the text with its background reaches at least Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0's AA level, and AAA level when feasible (see WCAG's "Understanding SC 1.4.3: Contrast (Minimum)"). To use named CSS colors for text on a white background, refer to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/CSS colors for text on white for recommended colors. Run your version through https://wave.webaim.org/ and you'll see multiple insufficient contrast problems. Colours for political parties are overkill at the best of times, but if you want to add them to this table, I suggest you section them off in their own column with no text, as per the table in the section, for example. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This is common across the project. Every single list of first ministers puts the number in the same cell as the party colour, just as a quick example. If it's such a major, egregious violation of the colour guidelines, then perhaps you should raise this on WP:CANADA and seek community-wide input and consensus rather than dealing with one random page at a time? — Kawnhr (talk) 21:46, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That's unfortunate but it doesn't mean it's correct to violate here and no consensus or input is needed: the guideline is clear and WP:ACCESS is a major, well-known guideline. If there are pages that violate it, as there are pages that violate most guidelines, those should be changed too, but their existence doesn't mean we don't fix it where we find it. —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:50, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Reversion of Toronto subway stations
I note that you reverted several Toronto subway articles that I recently edited, changing mdy dates to dmy dates. Your reasoning cites MOS:RETAIN, which states "When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, maintain it in the absence of consensus to the contrary." The vast majority of the individual station articles on Line 1 Yonge–University, as well as the main line article itself, were already defined to use mdy dates, which implies a consensus to use mdy dates on the line's articles. One of the main goals of Wikipedia is consistency between similar articles. That's why I changed a few of the station articles (which you reverted) so that all of the line's station articles consistently use mdy dates. With all due respect, would you please reconsider your reverts of these articles. Thank you. Truthanado (talk) 02:27, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you meant to say dmy dates. You were the one who changed them.
 * Consistency is nice but calling it a main goal of the project (in boldface, no less) is certainly overstating it, which is why we have policies like MOS:RETAIN, MOS:TIES, MOS:US, MOS:ENGVAR, MOS:UNIT, etc etc. I actually wish we were a bit more consistent overall. Anyway, a declaration of "implied" consensus by a single editor is immediately suspect as WP:ILIKEIT, and also, MOS:RETAIN isn't about related articles, it refers to consistency the article itself, as your quotation above clearly shows (i.e. it's not about consistency  articles). A single editor deciding that consensus exists across multiple articles without any prior discussion is improper, and more so when there's a policy that explicitly lays out what should be considered, which is the article's history of major contributions in the absence of strong ties to a date format.
 * I suggest you start a discussion at Talk:Toronto subway (and crosspost a notice to Talk:Toronto Transit Commission) asking if there's an appetite to standardize the subway station articles on the mdy date format. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Category deletion
Okay let's Joeyconnick please don't delete Category:Netflix controversies here's why even though Netflix is a great company they can be controversy with their movies with topics such as whitewashing and LGBT. I'm only keeping it to update. Please don't delete it i'm begging you i'm trying to seriously help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gng1999 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi... my request for deletion of the vague category isn't about me thinking Netflix is some shining beacon of greatness. It's about the fact that it's very hard, and maybe impossible, to objectively determine what rates as a "controversy" (which is why we are discouraged from creating "Controvery" sections in articles in general). Is the "controversy" over 13 Reasons Why the same as the "controversy" over House of Cards or Dave Chappelle's latest release on Netflix? For some people, just the inclusion of LGBT folks on shows is "controversial", so it's not a very useful label and it doesn't make for good categorization, either. —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:22, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Faulty dash script?
I can't figure out how a script inserted snd with unbalanced braces. It was a devil to track down. Please use preview and/or inspect your changes after saving. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:46, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It didn't... I manually added a few snd before I called the script, so that was purely human error. —Joeyconnick (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Legacies cast
This changes was made for this page to be more transparent. Seeing that e.g Chris Lee was both recurring star and also main star in season 2 without explaining that he was promoted to the main cast in half of the season is confusing. Please don't change it. Pk49x (talk) 19:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Why?
Why did you remove height?! Fadkh (talk) 20:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Because in most subject's cases, their height is not notable, so we don't include it. —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Could you maybe go and have a word with ?
His user page says he is retired when in fact he isn't, as he keeps changing the Bombardier page with no totally reliable source. Thanks, --Edgar Searle (talk) 21:25, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi ... I appreciate your frustration if that's what's going on, but I'm just a regular editor like most people here, so we generally don't ask folks to talk to other random editors directly. You can be sure if any editor is making lots of inappropriate edits, they will get complaints via official channels like WP:ANEW. —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

X-Men (film series)
Hey there! I noticed that you reverted the bold formatting on the films that were cancelled on this page. I'm confused as to your objection, given there are various other articles with similar sections and formatting. Your suggestion to use a "definition list"... could you clarify what you mean by this, or where to go to read about this formatting? Thanks m8!--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi... yeah, boldface is frequently misused in a variety of articles, but MOS:NOBOLD is clear about the (very limited) situations it should be used in. Regarding definition lists, I meant MOS:DEFLIST lists. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:24, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

"Hackney North Star" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Hackney North Star and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ✗ plicit  00:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

You know you're wrong and I won't say anything more
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=British_Columbia&oldid=prev&diff=1073160504, but Sure. I'll expect you to honour the results. Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * No, I really don't know I'm wrong, because I'm not. But you know, please keep telling me what I think. —Joeyconnick (talk) 08:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Freaks
I'm not an editor and don't know at all what I'm doing but I saw a dead link here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Freaks_(2018_film) and made a change that I know (though well intended) was done improperly. If someone could please edit it properly, I will gladly pay you Tuesday. Thank you. 74.134.183.248 (talk) 23:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

The Conjuring Universe
Hi again. Would I be able to get your thoughts on the current editing situation regarding the content removal at The Conjuring Universe please? Thanks. KaitoNkmra23  (talk!)  22:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Request blocking disruptive editor
There is an editor, "Alex (Brampton)" (talk) that continues with disruptive editing on various Toronto Transit Commission articles by adding there are no free transfers to GO Transit and even Ontario Northland to subway stations in Vaughan even though there are no general free transfers with the TTC system-wide. He also reverts to his own bad prose and grammar after it being corrected. You've warned him already but he still does it. Transportfan70 (talk) 05:38, 24 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree their edits are very, very subpar and I generally revert most of them immediately on seeing them as they are frequently unsourced or poorly sourced and, as you say, introduce clear grammatical issues. Someone would need to open a case at WP:ANI to get their behaviour properly addressed. —Joeyconnick (talk) 22:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Fwiw
Re this edit, I'm Australian, and can vouch that we use singular or plural. In fact, I'd use have as opposed to has any day of the week. I did a bit of digging too, and found that of the Australian biographies on Wikipedia that mention the sentence "the couple have..." or "the couple has" it's about 50/50. I guess it comes down to personal preference. Happy editing! —MelbourneStar ☆ talk 09:04, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to The Originals (season 5), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. -Magik 3099 (talk) 14:23, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Jacob Elordi
Why did you report my edit? what I have written is totally true, the Basque Country is part of Spain. I know that Mr Elordi has said no, but he is not right, and as he is a public figure, we should not allow him to lie internationally and confuse new generations. I am from the Basque country, and believe me I feel very Spanish. I imagine that you will not be Spanish and you will not understand how painful Mr. Elordi's words are. We have suffered persecution from the terrorist group Eta for years, simply for considering ourselves Spanish (which we are) and now that it no longer exists, now that we are fighting to live without fear, those words of the actor all they do is fan the fire of hatred in our autonomous community.

This is what Jacob Elordi says about his Spanish descendenciq: I descend from Basques, which are a small town that is located between France and Spain, “he assured after reading it. "My grandfather would strangle me if he knew that on Wikipedia it says 'Spanish descent'. As you can see, it denotes ignorance, since the Basques are Spanish, and is influenced by his grandfather's hatred towards his true roots.

The only thing I ask is that it be added that the Basque country is part of Spain, so that the people who read this article have complete and true information. 83.250.193.249 (talk) 08:41, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

North Vancouver rapid transit
About the North Van article. I didn't say the Burrard Inlet transit crossing is "planned", I said it's "being planned" because there already is a commitment for the crossing, it's the route, method, and timeline that are not certain. Those things are "being planned". https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/no-tunnel-planned-for-burrard-inlet-rapid-transit-project — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnezium7 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

disruptive edits on the Canadian dollar
Why did you removed the flags ? it make no since. whatever your reason is just stop doing it. MMQ735 (talk) 02:30, 22 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I removed them because we generally do not use flags period, and definitely not in infoboxoes, as per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG. They're only used if the subject of the article is officially representing the nation in question. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely Certainly and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Well, they just reverted again. I've made a report at WP:AN3, but I've reverted them three times today at the article and I'm not sure if this would count as an exception to 3RR. Their version without italics, etc. in violation of MOS:CANLAW is now the live version. Leave it up to you if you want to revert it back to status quo. Singularity42 (talk) 00:26, 8 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you SO MUCH for that report. Maybe the madness will actually stop now? I guess we'll know in just under 24 hours. —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah... I think it was just trolling at the end of the day given the last few comments on their talk page. Singularity42 (talk) 18:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello. NOAH SCHNAPP
Hello, please how does Noah having a twin sister stand out as trivia?. Uricdivine (talk) 21:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Because it's immaterial to understanding his notability. Unless his sister is notable in her own right, it's simply trivia. I'm sure he has cousins and aunts and uncles, too... so what? We list people's parents so that we can basically trace their lineage... unless his sister is somehow the reason he went into acting or there's some other sort of connection, him having siblings non-notable. —Joeyconnick (talk) 00:46, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Ok yes she has no notability but totally ignoring her existence is ignorance. Because readers are meant to know that where it was written that "Noah was born" he wasn't born alone. Also since your the only one against adding that Noah has a twin sister I am going to take it to the teahouse and if I have more than 2 editors saying is allowed I would change it since you chose to ignore the talk. Uricdivine (talk) 08:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Reverted edit on Devon Sawa
Hello, remember me? Anyways, I noticed that you undid my edit because it wasn't sourced. However, i guess I was kind of citing wikipedia because i got that info from Alpha Secondary School. Does this mean that all notable alumni need to be removed from school articles? I notice that on almost every school article, the notable alumni/faculty section is unsourced. -- Cosmic (talk) 00:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Reverted Edit on Ages of consent in North America
Hello Joeyconnick,

I just recently noticed that you reverted my edit on Ages of consent in North America by stating that the age of consent in Texas is 17. I recently found some sources to clarify that the age of consent in Texas is actually 18 as opposed to 17.[1 ][2 ][3 ]

I hope this helps you believe me.

Cheers, Squazyzilla (talk) 01:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

July 2022
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to List of Paramount+ original programming, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. BrickMaster02 (talk) 22:23, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Uhm yeah... no. If anyone is editing unconstructively, that would be you. My edit summaries clearly indicated I was removing multiple instances of templates that were unnecessary. Your reversions only said you were reverting to the last "good" version of the page, with no explanation as to why keeping dozens of unnecessary template calls in an article is somehow "good". —Joeyconnick (talk) 21:35, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Newfoundland dollar
Hello, I've tried to revert the edited list as every listing has been removed from former edits of other pages where it had been added. With all due respect I won't change it anymore and won't disturb the page any further. (I'm not a native English speaker so if there's a problem please contact me) 2001:A61:5AB:DA01:58FC:3BEB:8893:FA62 (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Board of Trustees election
Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 03:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Toronto streetcar system loops, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Main Street station.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

New York City and overlinking
I noticed your edit summary related to restoring the New York City link that I removed from the infobox in Sterling Jerins. You wrote, "Not clear why linking New York is overlink... we usually link cities; it's countries we don't link."

I was just applying what Wikipedia's Manual of Style says in MOS:OVERLINK. Under the heading "What generally should not be linked", the last sentence of the first paragraph says, "Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are usually not linked". The third bulleted item says, "The names of subjects with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar. This generally includes major examples of:", and the third bulleted item under that says, "locations (e.g., New Delhi; New York City, or just New York if the city context is already clear; London, if the context rules out London, Ontario; Southeast Asia)".

I interpret the fact that New York City is specified to mean that it should not be linked unless the use "is particularly relevant to the context in the article". Of course, "particularly relevant" is subjective. Is listing New York City as a place of birth "particularly relevant"? If so, I apologize for my incorrect interpretation. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:20, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

"Untitled Sonic the Hedgehog sequel" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Untitled Sonic the Hedgehog sequel and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 12 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 14:09, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

See-also links to articles on electric vehicles in cities
Recently, I added a bunch of see-also links in "Transportation in ___" articles that link to sections in "Plug-in electric vehicles in ___", using Template:Section link (which explicitly allows usage in see-also sections). You said that these links are supposed to be for "other articles", and I was wondering if you misread the links and thought they were to sections in the same article. If not, could you please explain in more detail why you removed them? Numberguy6 (talk) 19:13, 29 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, for those ones I did misread them... and I've self-reverted my removal of them in the "Transportation in..." types of articles. However, you are verging on topic-spamming with your clear interest in adding links to articles you've created and/or contributed to heavily in articles where the topic is a lot broader than "[x type of vehicles] in [this particular locality]". I'd urge you to slow down and consider whether such a narrow topic warrants the prominence of a "See also" template use in the general article on those places (cities/states/provinces/etc.). —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Short film revert
Hello Joeyconnick (talk)! I noticed you reverted my addition of a short film to Devon Bostick's filmography with the statement "Short films need their own articles for inclusion in filmography tables". This puzzles me as I've seen many, many short films without their own articles included in filmographies. There's even one on Devon Bostick's already, Verona (2010) has no Wikipedia article. Technically neither does short film "Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Class Clown" either, though that is mentioned in another film's article. I did include a reference to support the addition. I've double checked the guide for filmography tables & not only could I see no mention of said rule but it even has a short film listed in one of the example tables that has no Wikipedia article: Dance Me to the End of Love (2010). :) I wonder if you could point me to the page with that rule you mention please? Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 23:29, 29 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi... it's a standard practice but not part of any specific guideline—it stems from WP:V. The idea being a role in a short film is not notable enough to merit a mention if the short film itself doesn't even have an article, and indeed we wouldn't be able to verify that any actor had been in any particular short film if there's no citation for it.
 * So I guess if an actor's role in a short film can be cited, it can be included. You'll note that's the case with the "Dance Me to the End of Love" example. This is similar to how we treat listing films actors have been in where the film went unreleased, the actor went uncredited, or the actor's scenes were cut: all those cases require citation.)
 * As for the "there's many short films without articles in various actors' filmographies" angle, that's rarely relevant: many, many articles aren't necessarily following guidelines or standard practice, but that doesn't mean how they handle content is correct or acceptable, nor that how they handle it means that's how it should be handled in other articles. For instance, if I saw an article that didn't follow MOS:POSS (of which there are ), that doesn't mean I could go to another article, add "all the cats' fur was matted, have someone correct that to all the fur was matted, and then argue that their edit was wrong because there were other examples at Wikipedia where someone had formed the possessive of a word ending in 's' with just an apostrophe, rather than by adding . —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello Joeyconnick! Thanks for getting back to me. So no rule, just how you do things, I seem to encounter that a lot. :) Not standard practice where I've seen it either, as I mentioned there's even examples in the same article that you've left alone. So kind of puzzling why you removed mine. "So I guess if an actor's role in a short film can be cited, it can be included" I did reference it with a decent site, while the other examples in the article are unreferenced. The short film is actually a rarity for shorts in that it was even released on DVD & is available on Prime. There's other refs from film festivals that could be included but I did not want to go overboard, figured no one would argue over one solid ref for a short film. I'd definitely not have added it if I felt it was a phantom film. Since you agree that there is no rule & that a short can be included with a ref, I'll restore my addition. Thanks for talking it through. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 03:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed yours because I saw your addition as a recent change on my watchlist. I didn't check the entire filmography table this particular time around. So no conspiracy as you're not so subtly implying. —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello Joeyconnick! I'm sorry if you thought I was implying a conspiracy, that was not my intent, I was genuinely puzzled by your removal of my edit for the reasons given. I even added smiles :) to try & reassure the mood was not combative. Please also see from my point of view when you revert & mention it is because of violating a rule, then no rule exists, it can feel a little confusing as to why the action was taken. I at all times was polite & hoped for a conclusion that would leave both of us satisfied. That's why I came & talked this out rather than steamed in & reverted. Even when I concluded that restoring the edit would fit with your mention of a ref being present, I did not revert your change but instead added the film back anew, with an edit note mentioning an amenable discussion took place. I felt that was a friendlier way to do things. I've been bitten a few times here & really want to just edit without combat. Hope you understand that & there are no hard feelings. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 03:51, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Temporary streetcar route changes
Hello. Could you please reply to my comment in Talk:Toronto streetcar system. I like to clarify how this topic should be handled to avoid any conflicts with editorial standards. Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Madam Secretary cast
Hello! I am so sorry for my edit to the cast and characters section on the Madam Secretary page. I was go going by this, the table that says the ones I listed as guest and recurring were not Main in the 6th season. I'd fix it but those tables confuse me. --ACase0000 (talk) 02:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Canada Line wikilink revert
Hi - Saw you reverted the wikilink change for Canada Line. The problem with the wikilink that was there before is that it takes the user to the page about the j"governing body of the Metro Vancouver Regional District" – not about the actual area itself, which is, of course, what is being referred to. I agree about the WP:EASTER concern; I think the best thing to do would be to change the underlying text for the link to just be " Greater Vancouver ." Thoughts? Henrygg98 (talk) 22:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Sure... the whole "Greater vs. Metro" thing is always a pain. —Joeyconnick (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Cruel Summer - why did you revert my edits?
These edits are straightforward corrections of incorrect statements.

(a) Jeanette is not an outcast. She is just way down lower on the popularity scale compared to Kate. In the very first episode (scene with her dad), she refers to herself as a "nerdy" ("Yeah, Dad, I am. I'm kind of nerdy.) Source: https://tvshowtranscripts.ourboard.org/viewtopic.php?f=971&t=43515

(b) Jeanette does not "take over Kate's life". All she does is (a) hook up with Kate's boyfriend and (b) become best friends with Kate's two besties. That's not "Kate's life".

(c) There are no "multiple lawsuits". There is just one. RonaldPlate (talk) 21:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Okay, pretty sure (b) is entirely debatable.
 * But I reverted them over WP:TONE: "nerdy girl" and "legal wrangling" are not the right language for an encyclopedia. —Joeyconnick (talk) Joeyconnick (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What encyclopedia are you talking about?
 * "nerdy girl" is used close to a THOUSAND TIMES in Wikipedia
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=legal+wrangling&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1
 * "legal wrangling" is used close to a THOUSAND TIMES in Wikipedia
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=nerdy+girl&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 RonaldPlate (talk) 22:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Wow really? 1000 times in an encyclopedia with over a million articles?' That's like... most of them, right?
 * But to be serious, just because other people have neglected to follow the project's guidance doesn't mean that guidance can be ignored. Especially when it's pointed out. —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What is "pointed out"? RonaldPlate (talk) 09:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The fact that WP:TONE applies was "pointed out" by me when I reverted your edit and then engaged with you here on the issue. —Joeyconnick (talk) 22:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The fact that WP:TONE applies was "pointed out" by me when I reverted your edit and then engaged with you here on the issue. —Joeyconnick (talk) 22:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Transport vs transportation
User:Tbf69 moved a whole bunch of articles to "transport" and not just in Canadian related articles. Looks like this isn't the 1st time he has done mass moves without discussion. I would support moving the articles back to transportation. Masterhatch (talk) 00:19, 14 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I didn't move any articles which didn't need moving.
 * All of them are designed to follow the standard of "Transport in Xxx" on Wikipedia.
 * Some of the moves I made:
 * Transport in Oslo
 * Transport in Vienna
 * Transport in Mumbai
 * Transport in Sydney (via WP:RMT)
 * With regards to the Canadian ones, "Transport" is more widely used in Canadian English, especially by the government. See Transport Canada.
 * Therefore, I believe that using the "Transport in Xxx" for Canadian articles creates a nice balance between WP:COMMONNAME, WP:OFFICIALNAME, and precedent. ---   Tbf69   P &bull;&#32;T 08:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * One government agency's article does not somehow prove it's more widely used in Canadian English. See, for example, here.
 * And WP:ENGVAR means there is no need (and in fact it is discouraged) to "standardize" article titles across the whole project. —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Nick Robinson (American actor)
The information about his cousin that you claim is unsourced actually is sourced, by the image in the reference link. Please kindly do not remove the reference link from the article, or the information, because I will be very annoyed. DowntonAbbeyFan (talk) 21:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)


 * again, you cannot source a statement with an image, and also again, WP:INDISCRIMINATE. nearly everyone has cousins... why would we mention a single random one of Robinson's? —Joeyconnick (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Sadly, given that it has not been mentioned in interviews and only on his Instagram Story (which is, sadly, removed after 24 hours - not a fault of Wikipedia, mind you, just Instagram) it cannot be replicated, so there is no other way to source it. As for mentioning his "random" cousin, as you so put it: he was showing his support for the Phelan Lucky Campaign which comes from his cousin, Niney, having PMS (that's Phelan-McDermid Syndrome, not Post Menstrual Syndrome, btw, for anyone else reading this) and the campaign "which doesn't get the attention it deserves." Given that there is no other way to source it, how do we deal with this situation? --DowntonAbbeyFan (talk) 21:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * We don't include it. What part of everyone telling you that have you not been understanding? —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Roxham Road edit
Actually, I think you meant MOS:DATERANGE. Daniel Case (talk) 05:11, 23 February 2023 (UTC)