|
User talk:Millahnna/Archive 8  | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Millahnna. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello
Thank you for ur message
I'm new for here. Thank you for enlightening me
I tried to edit again & put https://www.facebook.com/ashok.lokhande.79/about for ref.
is it right?
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diyabaatithaifans (talk • contribs) 02:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
User talk:Doniago#Adminship - Someone's made a horrible, horrible mistake. :p DonIago (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
This is me just not signed in at the moment on my phone. Lol, and congrats. Hugs homie. 64.134.140.61 (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, though it ended up imploding in mildly spectacular fashion...in part because of my above note. Oh well, back to business as usual. DonIago (talk) 12:59, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Millahnna. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I sincerely apologise for being guilty of plot bloating. It seems like many other users are editing the film synopsis in a way that it lacks details, sounds abit way too informal and not serious. I'll try to make my synopses more concise the next time but I want the synopsis to be as self-explanatory as possible to someone who has never watched the film before. Also, the Other Mother's official name (so far) is the Beldam so I think this can help reduce overreaching the word limit. I hope you understand. Edwin trinh14 (talk) 10:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- Heya Edwin. For Wikipedia's purposes, plot summaries only need to explain the major beats of the overall story arc and support any real world info we have in other sections. As an example, we don't usually get into great detail about the specific ways characters die in slasher style horror movies. But we might mention a few of them if there is a section that goes into detail about special effects during filming. Because this varies a bit from article to article, you'll see some plot sections that are a little less dry broad strokes, and a little more specific.
- Writing wiki plot summaries is this really weird trick of being thorough but broad; I like the challenge. That said, the style of plot summary you were working on would probably be excellent on a wikia with a more in universe approach to their subject. I enjoyed reading it. Millahnna (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I saw your edit summary here. Yes, the WikiProject Television community does prefer the omission of -gonist and other subjective labels. It's not codified in MOS:TV, but it is general practice. Also, oddly pervasive in Indian TV articles is the inclusion of "Main Male Lead" phrasing, which is just odd, because 1) we don't need to be told who the males and females are. That's just weird. 2) Main and Lead are somewhat redundant. 3) If they're in the Main section and listed at the top, we can probably presume (especially if there are coherent character descriptions) that these are the leads. But even "lead" is rather interpretive.
And just so you know, I'm not criticising your edit, since you were reverting to a previous version, I'm just explaining the norms. Indian TV articles tend to be full of this sort of weirdness for some reason. I think it's just because someone got the groupthink going and now it can't be stopped. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I've bumped into the same thing on Telenovelas within the TV project; in both film and TV I've noticed that articles about non-English topics tend to draw this sort of thing (as do shows and films aimed at kids). It really is the weirdest thing. But I'll be more confident removing it in the future when I see it. Thanks again. Millahnna (talk) 01:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
|
