User talk:KyleJoan/Archives/2019/December

Disambiguation link notification for December 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Don Lemon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cameroonian ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Don_Lemon check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Don_Lemon?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Half Million Award for The Bold Type

 * Wow! Thank you very much for the recognition, ! KyleJoan  08:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Your recent editing history at Timothée Chalamet shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 09:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

scarlett
Hi. I would appreciate if you help me with the Scarlett article, instead of delete the section. English isn't my first languaje, so it's hard for me to write complex sections. However, I think the subject is notable since it's covered and also, explains Scarlet's pro wrestling point of view. Also, I think the WWE is best on last. Her previous roles are minimal, just a sidenote. She wasn't hired or something, just a few matches like Styles, Samoa Joe or Jon Moxley had back in the day. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Hey there, ! Pardon the delayed response. I deleted the section because I felt as if the subject was not notable and the sources used seemed either unproven or unreliable. I also have done a little research on the persona and have only found a handful of reliable sources that have mentioned it in specific. It gets trickier because the only notable promotion the persona has been used is Impact Wrestling, so another argument would be to mention the persona under the section regarding her run with that promotion, which already exists. If you still want to obtain more editors' opinions on the matter, I suggest starting a discussion on the article's talk page and/or opening an RfC to gain a wider range or editors to chime in.


 * Regarding the placement of the WWE section, from my understanding, the chronological order of the sections are based on when each run with each company began regardless of the scale. If she jobbed once a year that started in the year 2000 then the WWE section would normally be placed where that time period is. I personally don't have a preference on where each section goes because they're all still relatively brief, but that's what I've found. Thanks! KyleJoan  02:05, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I will try to find other sources. However, it's usefull to include the wrestling character section, since In Wrestling isn't here anymore. About the chronological, you are right. However, I think we made a few exceptions for the good of the article. For example, Jom Moxley worked in WWE in 206 and 2007, but his WWE section starts in 2011. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:03, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It's useful if there are enough reliable sources present, otherwise, it doesn't adhere to WP:V and is not very appropriate. I personally believe the sentence describing the persona under the Impact Wrestling section is sufficient for now because that's the only reliable source on the subject. I understand she's done a few interviews describing/defending the persona, but if the section has more interview quotes than descriptions, then I believe it may not adhere to WP:UNDUE. As for the sorting of the sections, Moxley's sections are sorted in a way where the WWE-related matches prior to his contract signing are bundled up with all of his other appearances following his departure from HWA. Bordeaux's article splits her career into specific promotions beginning with OVW, so it's a vastly different case. If you'd like to start a discussion on the article's talk page to obtain other editors' views, I'd love to participate and hear what they have to say as well. Thanks! KyleJoan  02:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK for The Bold Type
Gatoclass (talk) 01:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * That's wonderful! Thank you for notifying me! KyleJoan  02:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Conversion templates
Hello, you have added conversion templates in some of the BLP infoboxes in your recent edits. Could you explain why, since the "Infobox professional wrestler" does this automatically. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:12, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * That was 100% my bad! I completely forgot that the professional wrestler infobox works differently than a regular person infobox. Thank you for reaching out! KyleJoan  02:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * That's totally OK mate. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Harry Styles page
Hi, I don't understand why the Camille Rowe mention was removed from Harry's page. I know before there was some debate regarding its significance, but it's been all over the press these days. It's also one of the few times he publicly acknowledged a relationship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily32241 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I know nothing about the removal or the preceding debate. KyleJoan  07:24, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kenny Omega
The article Kenny Omega you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Kenny Omega for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 19:41, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kenny Omega
The article Kenny Omega you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Kenny Omega for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 07:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Abby Huntsman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Abby_Huntsman check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Abby_Huntsman?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:38, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello KyleJoan: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message


 * Thank you very much! Very kind of you. Happy holidays to you as well! KyleJoan talk  05:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)


 * You are most welcome. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:24, 28 December 2019 (UTC)