User talk:Doniago/Archive 106
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotNote: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have. SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC) SD40What are you doing here? You realise that 80% of articles means that well over a million articles need more than 40 characters to provide sufficient context, right? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 20:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for commentYour feedback is requested at Talk:Barbenheimer on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 30 July 2023 (UTC) Discussion about meWell it seems the edits I've made that have been reverted are very minor, not substantial or even major. So yes I apologise, but to go as far as wanting to block me is an overreaction in my opinion and not necessary. I never change important information without reliable sources. I mostly add dates and very little information, so I won't even do that anymore and there's no need to block me, thank you. Gorrrillla5 03:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Psycho GenreHello, I hope you are well. I noticed you have reverted the genre lead of Psycho from horror back to thriller. If you visit the film's talk page, the consensus was reached that horror was more relevant and appropriate for this film. Thriller is a very broad genre, and Here are several articles supporting its place as one of the most influential horror films: https://ew.com/article/2009/08/04/psycho-the-horror-movie-that-changed-the-genre/ https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/oct/22/psycho-horror-hitchcock https://www.popmatters.com/alfred-hitchcock-psycho-mother-horrors https://decider.com/2019/10/19/psycho-perfect-horror-movie/ https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/how-alfred-hitchcock-psycho-changed-horror-forever/ IMDb has it listed as a Horror, Mystery, Thriller, and Rotten Tomatoes, in its genre listing as well as its critics consensus, refers to it as a horror film. Even the 'Horror film' Wikipedia page mentions Psycho as one of the most significant horror films that changed cinema in the 1960s here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horror_film So I hope this can be the same for the film's Wikipedia page to keep it in conformity with all the other sources. Thank you. HA5797 (talk) 07:15, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotNote: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have. SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:37, 11 August 2023 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotNote: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have. SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC) Reversion of edits.The point you made about discussing the reversion of edits to Star Trek: First Contact on the article's talk page may be a valid one. However, this would not be applicable to the reference which you deleted (for the reason which I stated clearly in the edit history). I did not revert the edit in which the quote was removed as in my opinion there was just cause to do so. However it was necessary to reinstate the reference as this was cited elsewhere and was therefore listed as missing in the References section. (Edwin of Northumbria (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)) Also, please also note that whilst I have made some amendments to the deleted sentence, I was not responsible for adding it to begin with, and was merely following the guidelines in WP:DOREVERT: "Whenever you believe that the author of an edit was simply misinformed, made a mistake, or did not think an edit through, go ahead and revert" (my emphasis). Moreover, WP:BRD states that an editor should "[d]iscuss [their] bold edit with the person who reverted [them]. To follow BRD specifically, instead of one of the many alternatives, [they] must not restore [their] bold edit." (my emphasis). In this case, since it was the other editor who made the initial bold edit, if you were following the spirit of the guidelines as I interpret them, it could be argued that you should not have reverted my edit because this was itself an reversion!! A better approach would have been to leave the article as it was and initiate a discussion on the talk page yourself. (Edwin of Northumbria (talk) 20:41, 25 August 2023 (UTC))
Re: Edward Scissorhands citationHello, I wanted to address your reversion of my edits and your message on my talk page about this topic. When I made my addition, I searched far and wide for a better source, unfortunately it's a rather peculiar thing to find a source for, but is easily verifiable. I surmise that the Wikipedia article on the episode would be enough evidence, and it takes less than five minutes of viewing the episode for the references to appear. It's just that for whatever reason the IMDB page doesn't include this as trivia or as a reference itself, making it hard to source elsewhere. There are simply no sources available, but it's easily verifiable information regardless of sources, which makes this a difficult matter. I do not believe the lack of sources is reason to ban the inclusion of the episode on said article, as it's not a dubious claim in the slightest, it's fact. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia editing, but I'd like to hear from a third party on this matter. Retta283 (talk) 02:43, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for commentYour feedback is requested at Talk:Maske: Thaery on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotNote: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have. SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC) Recent post on my talk pageHi Doniago, You posted on my talk page stating that I did not cite a source in an edit I made. The edit I made was to the subheader of the article that appears on the mobile app (article description is how the app describes it when you go to edit it). As far as I know, there is no way to cite a source in the article description. Please let me know if I am incorrect. JMcElhaney10 (talk) 12:02, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
|