User talk:Normaraga

Common name
The policy at WP:COMMONNAME says to use the common name of the work. The entire subtitle is not necessary when the main title is concise and to the point. For a related example, the film Rogue One: A Star Wars Story is at Rogue One. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb is at Dr. Strangelove. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 02:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)


 * WP:COMMONNAME applies to the project that adapts a number of television shows, films, and video games. Complete title of the film, single project itself, is imperative, related example: X-Men:_The_Last_Stand. What you have done, possibly with no mean of harm, is a malicious removal of encyclopedic content beyond all recognition, apparently with the sole purpose to make it look like Lauren Ridloff, the subject you are feeding, is the only deaf superhero. Speaking of her page, you have also delete references from articles (ScreenRant, WhattoWatch) mentioning correctly the complete title of the film. Again, this is done for the same malicious purpose and goes against the principles of Wikipedia. Lauren is mentioned in the page of Sign Gene: The First Deaf Superheroes as the first deaf superhero in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it is not like that this info should be hidden. Normaraga (talk) 09:52, 27 November 2021 (UTC)


 * No malice is intended. Neither of us are being malicious. X-Men: The Last Stand is not a good example because to drop the subtitle would mean to use just X-Men, and that is already taken by the first film at X-Men (film). Sometimes the subtitle is warranted, like Solo: A Star Wars Story was determined by consensus to be more appropriate than Solo (2018 film). (There are also many other films just called Solo.) If you really think the article title for Sign Gene should display the full title, please start a WP:RM discussion to get multiple editors to weigh in.


 * How Wikipedia covers Sign Gene must be proportional per WP:NPOV. Just because a work exists does not mean that we editors can personally boost the importance of the work. We have to summarize the importance of a work as written by reliable sources. Lauren Ridloff was a background character in Sign Gene, and there is no indication in reliable sources that her appearance in that film had any bearing on her casting in Eternals. On the flip side, none of the English-language sources I can see about Sign Gene even mention Ridloff. So the fact that she has appeared in these two superhero-themed films is happenstance. That means there is no independent backing to have a "Social Impact" section at Sign Gene about her. I think that film article is better off extracting more from sources writing about the film itself, like Japan Today, Kansai Scene, and Pacific Standard. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 22:05, 27 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Also, checking the policies and guidelines, I don't see anything that says the full official title can't be used in the article body. So I've restored that at Lauren Ridloff. However, the film should still be at Sign Gene for the article title. I have no issue with the full official title being used in its opening sentence and in the film infobox. If you insist that the article title should be unnecessarily longer, please see WP:RM. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 22:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In regard to social impact, ScreenRant should work.
 * Happy to hear no malice is intended. Thank you and have a nice day. Normaraga (talk) 08:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Block notice
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:56, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * See User:Discebaimit.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:56, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of 1.8.8.0. for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1.8.8.0. 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/1.8.8.0. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. JohnmgKing (talk) 16:22, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Jux Clerc for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jux Clerc 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/Jux Clerc until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. JohnmgKing (talk) 16:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Tatsumi Fuwa for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tatsumi Fuwa 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/Tatsumi Fuwa until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. JohnmgKing (talk) 16:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)