User talk:Right cite/Archive 1

Deletion review for InnerSloth
An editor has asked for a deletion review of InnerSloth. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Right cite (talk) 13:25, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy notice - Discretionary sanctions for BLP information
--Hipal/Ronz (talk) 22:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

GOCE Requests limit
Hi there! At WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, we have a limit of two open requests per requester. You currently have three requests posted. Can you please remove one of them? As soon as one of your two requests is marked as Done, you may submit another. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:11, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
I think we've made a good turn in our discussions. Thanks for sticking with it. I'm very terse and stubbornly focus on what I think are the main policy concerns. I realize that my approach can be disagreeable to some people. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Bloodlust Zombies
Hi Right cite. Good work on the article! My main suggestions would be the following:
 * Per MOS:LEADCITE, you don't generally need citations in the lead of the article, as the lead of the article should summarize what is in the article. One of the few exceptions is if you are quoting someone or have a particularly controversial statement. So those could be re-arranged.
 * Per WP:FILMPLOT, you don't need to use sources for plot as its primary source is the film in question which is accessible and confirmable that way.
 * As your cast section is generally full of unknown actors, it's probably a little bloated and could be trimmed. At this present time for example, actors who played minor zombies in the film probably don't need notice. This section could probably use a source as well to back it up, but it's not 100% necessary.
 * I'd scrap the letterboxed review, as we don't usually take user-generated content as sources (i.e: we don't repost the reviews from IMDb or Letterboxd) as these fluctuate daily and are not published sources.
 * Genre section seems to be a unique section I don't see in film articles. It's not bad, but perhaps some of it could be placed into production, (check out MOS:FILM if you haven't, but it looks like you have. :) ). It might be easier to shove it into the an earlier section just so viewers can understand the film in its context that way. Not 100% essential though. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Your infobox should reflect information that's in the article. Currently, it says the film was first released in July 2011, but the infobox says otherwise. Which is it? Generally, film releases are only considered "premieres" if they are broadcast to a non-private audience (i.e: the general public can see it via a film festival screening, a home town premiere, etc.). I'm assuming this date is pulled from IMDb where it says "conference screening". I'd try to look into seeing what that was about and see if it follows the previous guidelines. It'll need to be sourced anyways if its to remain in the article.

That's all I can spot form a quick preview. good luck with your GA review! Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexis Texas
The article Alexis Texas you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Alexis Texas 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 ArnabSaha -- ArnabSaha (talk) 12:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

A lengthy welcome
HI Right cite. We're having difficulty communicating, so I thought I share with you the welcome message that I provide to new editors when I see them treading into some of the more difficult areas of Wikipedia:

Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily in collaboration.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again.

Maybe this context will help you understand my concerns better. Talk page guidelines and Dispute resolution might be helpful as well.

Thanks for reading this. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 17:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks very much, I really appreciate this! I also want to have less difficulty communicating better with you too also! Hopefully we can both work together on improving our communication together! Right cite (talk) 17:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Al Seckel - Thank you
Thanks for your work on the article. There was a lot of COI-editing there, mostly before the policies and guideline around COI were overhauled. Because of the demands of BLP, it was difficult to make progress cleaning it all up. I was hoping that all the interest in Epstein would result in more references we could use, but I've not seen anything. Thanks again. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for thanking me for my cleanup work to make sure this page adheres to site policies including WP:SOAP and WP:NOR. Right cite (talk) 21:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Also, recent discussions probably shouldn't be archived --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 00:12, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Casey Calvert
In a BLP, the burden is on those seeking inclusion to get consensus. How would you like to proceed? Asking for help at relevant Wikiprojects can be helpful, though asking at a noticeboard gives broader results. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 05:40, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Right cite (talk) 14:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * (use of "Rollback" tool) Right cite (talk) 16:17, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

How can we collaborate?
Thanks for keeping some discussion going between us. You clearly don't like me undoing edits. However, it's standard editing. We're here to collaborate on improving this encyclopedia. I provided you with details at AN3. I've pointed out here that in the case of BLP, the burden is on those seeking inclusion. How do we proceed? --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:32, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: Reply was reverted using the "Rollback" tool DIFF. Right cite (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Please respond here and detail how we can work together. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:37, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * did it again. Right cite (talk) 16:44, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Paul Seckel
On Paul Seckel I just disambiguated a link to New York. I have no thoughts on whether it should stay as an article.&mdash; Rod talk 14:10, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Note on talk page use
I think the terms for commenting on my talk page are clear. I'm happy to clarify if that would help. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:49, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Are we making progress?
Great job again on finding the new ref for Al Seckel. I'm not happy with how the various discussions are going, but that bit of progress is more than enough for me. I'm also open for a different approach. What do you think about how it went today? --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 01:49, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm hesitant, but I thank you for working on improving your tone and your behavior patterns. I hope this behavior will continue to improve, especially a decrease in the assumptions. Thanks. Right cite (talk) 11:53, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:05, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Attempt to request mutual disengage failed
. Right cite (talk) 17:25, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar(s) for you
I wanted to congratulate you for your contributions. I thought you deserve recognition but then realized it would actually be two areas:



Nomination of Mango (Saturday Night Live) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mango (Saturday Night Live), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Mango (Saturday Night Live) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:08, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Deletion attempt failed. Result was Keep. Right cite (talk) 18:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Withdrawing a report
I don't think reports should be removed like that. Instead I'd add a comment that you're withdrawing it. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , done! Right cite (talk) 19:33, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Jiz Lee
Well, the article is fine. If you really want criticism, the lead is a bit top-heavy and cluttered. WP:MOSLEAD says to avoid a lot of cites in the lead, and too many wikilinks. Maybe one of the lead paragraphs can be moved into a section? Abductive (reasoning) 18:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks very much! Will work on reducing cites, wikilinks, and overall size of the intro section. Right cite (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for taking initiative on Star Saga One: Beyond the Boundary, that did the trick. Do you see anything more that can be done for Sargon III? 98.32.192.121 (talk) 03:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Suggest you may wish to try discussing that one on Talk:Sargon III. Right cite (talk) 03:35, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Casey Calvert
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Casey Calvert has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

In the Personal life section this sentence appears: "She explained her views on feminism to author Rich Moreland in the book, Pornography Feminism: As Powerful as She Wants to Be, "Feminism is all about the right to choice." I added-saying, "Feminism is all about the right to choice."  I assume "choice" should be "choose", but I did not want to change it without checking the source. This will need to be done and the correction made that is the case.

Best of luck with the GAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much for your copyediting help! I checked the reference again, it is quoted accurately, last word is "choice". What do you think of the current article quality as it stands, now? Right cite (talk) 21:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Reading it again, I can see that "choice" works. I think the article provides an unbiased, fairly comprehensive look at the subject which is what a Wikipedia reader would expect. Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:58, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much for your neutral assessment of the article's unbiased tone. Right cite (talk) 13:01, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

COI check
Hello. Do you have any links to the porn industry or Lee Roy Myers? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 21:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , nope. Saw an article or two being attempted for deletion from the Article Rescue Squadron. Successfully rescued a few from deletion, after improving them with research. Hadn't heard of Lee Roy Myers before a week or so ago, after same research process. Thanks! Right cite (talk) 22:37, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks for clarifying. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 22:40, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , you're welcome. Cheers to you as well, Right cite (talk) 22:41, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Mango
I wanted to say, excellent job with Mango (Saturday Night Live)! Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 20:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much! It was a teamwork effort with . Right cite (talk) 20:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Aroused (film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Aroused (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HumanxAnthro -- HumanxAnthro (talk) 23:41, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hipal and stalking
I requested Hipal stop stalking me.

This was their response:.

Right cite (talk) 19:45, 16 November 2020 (UTC) [[User:Right cite|Right cite] (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Archiving talk page posts
I noticed that you manually oneclickarchived multiple talk page posts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Film awards task force. That project talk page is set up to have a bot archive it every 90 days. If the bot isn't archiving posts on a talk page it is a good idea to figure out why the bot isn't working correctly on that page. The reason I mention this is that the archive page was set up incorrectly. There is the old/outdated/incorrectly-named archive page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Film awards task force/Archive 1 and the corrected archive page with the actual page name Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Film awards task force/Archive 1. So. Now there are two archive pages, one with the actual WikiProject name WikiProject Film and one with the outdated/old name of WikiProject Films. The various page moves that will now have to be done are more complicated than the tools I can use, I am going to contact an admin to fix these mangled archive pages. Until I get back to you, please do not use the OnePageArchive tool on any further WikiProject or article talk pages. For the time being if you have a question about why a talk page isn't archiving please post your query on that talk page or maybe post a query at Village pump (technical). Shearonink (talk) 20:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Aroused (film)
The article Aroused (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Aroused (film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HumanxAnthro -- HumanxAnthro (talk) 02:41, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks very much for your thoughtful and in-depth good article review. Your suggestions were good, and they helped make the article good, as well. Thanks again for your input, Right cite (talk) 03:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Next project
Reading about WP:BIAS and WP:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. Right cite (talk) 18:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Warning given
DIFF. Right cite (talk) 23:46, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Requested to stop the wikihounding
Response was DIFF. Right cite (talk) 17:21, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * And again at DIFF. Right cite (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * And again at DIFF. Right cite (talk) 19:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Ongoing project
Writing up a new Wikipedia article about a film. Right cite (talk) 04:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Update: Probably five more sources or so to read through. Right cite (talk) 04:29, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Just have to write up an introduction section next. Right cite (talk) 17:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Alexis Texas
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Alexis Texas has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:55, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Emily W. Murphy
Hi Right cite, I'm just letting recent contributors to Emily W. Murphy know that I've dropped the protection level to extended confirmed and added a consensus required restriction. Please see my explanation on the talk page for more information. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:52, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , okay no problem, good luck to all those contributors! Right cite (talk) 13:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * -- thanks very very much!!! Right cite (talk) 22:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)