Hello Waxworker. I added the Nec Pc-8801 version because I found it on the Game Preservation Society's Pc-8801 Library. In fact, this version was already dumped. All I need is help with, is citing the website I found it on.
Dear Waxworker, In the article for Frankenstein in media, I am unsure how to cite a source for a game that is so under-researched. I mean you look it up on google and you barely get any results. The official page for the game has next to no info. Matter of fact I think i've made the most info publicly available since the 3 years the game released. I wanna clear up my info on the Frankenstein page so I can get back to making a full article for the game.
Sincerely, Ender-Gamer-07 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ender-Gamer-07 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ender-Gamer-07: - Reliable sources are necessary for verification and to show that the appearance is notable per WP:BURDEN - also see MOS:POPCULT, which states that "Cultural references about the article's subject should not be included merely because they exist. Cultural aspects of the subject should be included only if they are supported by reliable secondary or tertiary sources that discuss the subject's cultural impact in some depth" - reliable sources discussing the cultural impact of the game referencing Frankenstein are needed. I recommend looking over WP:VG/RS, a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games. Metacritic lists several reviews which could be used for an article. Note that not all review outlets listed by Metacritic are reliable - per WP:VG/RS, Gaming Trend, GameSkinny, KeenGamer are unreliable, Screenrant's reliability is debated, but IGN, Jeuxvideo, and Rock Paper Shotgun are reliable. These reviews may be suitable for an article about the game itself but they're probably unsuitable for POPCULT content. Waxworker (talk) 08:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Joe Pera
Waxworker, it is not worth removing my edit in the Joe Pera article. Judging by his surname which does sound Italian-American, and the fact that he was born in the state of New York makes it more acceptable to find it that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluddsskark (talk • contribs) 08:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I never add something I'm not completely sure about it. In her IMDB page[1] it's listed[2]. Please don't delete anything without verifing. Like other had told you in this same page, please first search and then delete. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilerudoy2 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Look up his birthday on his IMDB page. It is different. I went to FamilySearch and looked him up. He was born in August of 1938. Stop bothering people who make accurate corrections. I have given up because editors are such morons. Be inaccurate. That is what Wikipedia is known for. A crappy site with crappy volunteers.
Red River Valley
Regarding your deletion of my addition for being unsourced - half the tracks listed there are also unsourced. Regardless, I've re-added with the exact record it was recorded onto. I find your deletion ironic considering the enormous bolded statement on your page: "If an article on Wikipedia is bad, the solution is to improve, not delete." It took me thirty seconds of searching to find the source. Pretty easy improvement, I think.
Mediacorp Artistes
Hi, the star awards 2024 was conducted on 21 April 2024 and the artistes have already received their awards as stated and based on their previous they do not have sources stated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.74.103.26 (talk) 23:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MaBoShi Credits
Hi, rather than go back and forth over edits to the MaBoShi page based on the Staff Credits/Roll contained in the game, I thought I'd start a section here. I wondered how you would recommend citing the credits to the game?
I took a video of the credits in the game, but my uploading it is not deemed reliable enough. I also have this information on my blog, but I would assume that is also not reliable enough. If the developer of the game was to upload a video of the credits to YouTube would that be reliable enough? Thanks. —Flicky1984 (talk) 14:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Flicky1984: - Blogs are generally unreliable per WP:BLOGS. Articles for video games don't list everyone who worked on a game - I think listing five programmers is unnecessary. A listing of the credits officially published by the developer would verify the information, but doesn't necessarily mean it should be included on the article. I think the staff already noted in the article from the Nintendo Life interview is sufficient. Waxworker (talk) 15:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy birthday! Shall we come up with a list of articles to be placed under pending changes protection? If the unwanted changes are no longer visible immediately, I wonder if it will disincentivise the sockmaster. – robertsky (talk) 00:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Robertsky: - Here's hoping, but given how long they've been doing this, I doubt it. Off the top of my head, Alice Chan and Felicia Chin have been edited by socks a lot. I'm unsure if many of the targeted articles receive enough disruption to warrant protection - in many cases, the edits are months apart. Waxworker (talk) 00:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HarmonyBunny00: - The date for the source is incorrect, the article appears to say 'December 5, 2001' at the top, and the bottom of the article has a copyright date of 2001. 'Archive-date' is correct in that it is the date it was archived on Archive.org, but 'date' should be the date the source was published. 'ITMEDIA' should also be in the 'website=' section. If you have any other questions, I recommend asking at the WP:TEAHOUSE. Waxworker (talk) 20:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas!
BOZ (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer. :) BOZ (talk) 00:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that it was necessary to undo the wild idea, but you could have added citations from the main article and avoid an undo. I have now, but kind of overdoing the steps. ? Orastor (talk) 14:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your undo on Norwegian profanity
Happy New Year! I understand that it was needed to undo my edits, but I have sourced the words from various language websites when I add them. Maybe you hadn't noticed the references and that's why the misunderstanding exists? Apologies if I am wrong or something.
HarlambriDaabrev (talk) 8:45, 1 January 2024 (EEC)
@HarlambiDaabrev: - Every entry added needs a source - not all of the entries you added are sourced, and the 'fiskersiden.no' ref is a forum post, which is an unreliable source per WP:USERGENERATED. 'norwegianlanguagelearning.no' appears similarly unreliable and is a blog tied to a Discord server, see WP:BLOGS. Per WP:BURDEN, "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". Reliable sources are necessary for verification. Waxworker (talk) 06:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you removed a film that I added to the filmography of the British actor John Neville and left this message on my page: //Hello, I'm Waxworker. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, John Neville (actor), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Waxworker (talk) 06:39, 11 January 2024//
If you notice, none of the films and programs in Mr. Neville's filmography are cited with any source at all. Most of them are cross-referenced to articles on the individual films but not all of them. Perhaps I should remove the other films from the filmography and post a message on the talk page for John Neville that they all need to be provided with a reliable source? Please advise.
Since you seem to have an interest in this actor, you would probably like the film that I added to the filmography, since his John Milton was a really fine performance and you should see it if you can.
Pascalulu88 (talk) 19:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be more interested in deleting things than in getting them sourced to improve an article(?) Oh well, à chacun son goût. I'll get that film properly sourced because it's one of John Neville's best performances from the 1970s. Thanks! Pascalulu88 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vajzë Blu: - The AV Club is a reliable source per WP:RSP. None of the other sources have previously been discussed at WP:RSN, which doesn't nescessarily mean they're unreliable, but the other sources seem questionable to me. 'vanlifewanderer' doesn't list an 'about us', I can't find any mention of the website or 'StomachPunch Media' in reliable sources, and every article on the site appears to be written by the same person - it doesn't seem reliable at all. 'Ned Hardy' does have an 'about us' page and a fact-checking policy page, but I can't find the site mentioned in reliable sources and articles on the site read as churnalism to me. 'TV Obsessive' does have an about us and lists a staff team, but it hasn't been mentioned in reliable sources, and the linked article cited Wikipedia itself. The AV Club ref is the only source there I'd consider reliable. Waxworker (talk) 12:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, the edits for Roger Craig Smith and Noah Watts crediting them for reprising their Assassin's Creed roles for Assassin's Creed Nexus VR, since it's confirmed in the credits and on their social media that it's them voicing Ezio and Connor again. SpyderSoup (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SpyderSoup: - This appears to be a tweet from a fan, which is unreliable. Confirmation from gaming news sites or a tweet from the voice actors themselves or Ubisoft would be suitable. Waxworker (talk) 13:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SpyderSoup: - 'Mobilesyrup' doesn't seem like a great source to me, it's previously been discussed at WP:RSN with the discussion here appearing to me to lean towards 'unclear reliability/unreliable'. I'm unable to view the retweets on the linked Tweet as I lack a Twitter, but I'm unsure if the voice actors just retweeting it makes the tweet a reliable source for the information. Waxworker (talk) 13:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good points. Well, like I said, the credits of the game show that it is the original voice actors reprising their roles in the game. If you want, I can send a screenshot. SpyderSoup (talk) 13:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SpyderSoup: - Template:Cite video game can be used to cite the game itself, but in practice I've only seen this used on the Wikipedia articles for the games themselves and doesn't seem like a great source for a biography, where sourcing is more stringent. A screenshot of the credits wouldn't be reliable, as it would be WP:USERGENERATED. Waxworker (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have anything better to do?
I'd thought I told you to stop stalking me, all I was doing is putting edit back tge way they were because they were vandalized by another user. Not every single edit someone puts in or corrects doesn't need a cited source and such, now I'm gonna tell you politly again for the last time, stop stalking me, leave me alone. 2601:188:CC81:C420:70C5:17E6:B143:46B6 (talk) 19:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@2601:188:CC81:C420:70C5:17E6:B143:46B6: - I am not stalking you. Removal of unsourced content is not vandalism, please see WP:NOTVAND, and WP:BURDEN which states that "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". Unsourced content may be challenged and removed at any time. I've started a discussion on Talk:Bruce Dinsmore regarding the filmography section - your input there would be appreciated. Waxworker (talk) 19:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apology
Hey, just so you know I apologize for my last message I send to you, I was just so feed up with my edits being reverted over and over again and i just didn't understood why you kept on doing it to me on every article I go too. That's why I misunderstood you for stalking me, which you weren't doing. I understand that you were only following the policy, I unfortunately have a lot of trouble with that, I understand that Wikiiedia is very strict with information and souces, I'm just trying my hardest to accept it. Again, I deeply apologize for being cruel to you. 2601:188:CC81:C420:9920:B149:238E:9466 (talk) 20:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't care if you revert it again. Your site will be the ones with the wrong info. This site honestly sucks and is incredibly hostile to people for following the literal structure of the page lmao. Never going to edit here again, thanks for driving me off the site. :) 184.153.223.6 (talk) 19:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thu Feb 8 NYC Hacking Night + Feb 21 WikiWednesday
WikiWednesday is back this month! You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!
All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person, you should be vaccinated and be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate.
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Puppet Combo, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
You’re like a hero on Wikipedia. I’m a respectful editor on this site as well as finding reliable sources. Is there someway I could get a badge? I’ve noticed some of the editors receive them.
You reverted my additions on a TV drama show in which the two actors starred together in 2024, because I didn't include a reference. The drama can be streamed on Viki.com right now. I learned that the website "mydramalist.com" is blacklisted and not considered a reliable reference. How about "Viki.com" itself? Would, e.g., a link to [[1]] be permissible? (Although I would be concerned because it could be available only temporarily.) I am not Chinese and cannot add a link to a Chinese publication. Maybe you can. Seher7in (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Seher7in: - Listings on streaming platforms aren't a great source, but its better than no source. The page for the show itself rather than the page you linked seems more suitable. The Wayback Machine on Archive.org can be used to save a snapshot of the page as it exists now to serve as a backup if the page is ever removed from the site - the url for the archive may be added under 'archive url' when adding a reference using cite web. Waxworker (talk) 10:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware that Wikipedia has very strict policies regarding the description of living people, but I think it's not as strict for deceased individuals.
Do you still believe that you absolutely need a reliable source?
(a) Mōri Motonari left a testament saying, "There is no need for further territorial expansion. We must not get entangled in central conflicts". However, conflict with Oda Nobunaga, who sought to expand his dominion, began, within three years after Motonari's death.
(b) Before death, Mori Motonari had declared himself no friend to Nobunaga, and the young Terumoto openly challenged Nobunaga. It happened that the Môri were to be drawn into war over the Ishiyama Hongan-ji War, a religious stronghold in Settsu, Nobunaga had been besieging since 1570.
The event will feature lightning talks and a Wiki-fashion show, for which you are encouraged to dress in your finest Wikimedia clothing and accessories (bags, buttons, even books), or clothing connected to the topics you edit on wiki projects.
All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person you should be vaccinated and also be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate.
@Jayen466: - Per WP:BURDEN, the onus is on the editor adding content to provide a source verifying it. Adding sources in edit summaries rather than adding a ref also isn't great as that can get easily buried in the edit history, making it harder for people to verify in the future. Waxworker (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jayen466: - Despite it saying it is an "optional field", challenged content should be sourced per WP:BURDEN, which states that citations are required for "all material whose verifiability has been challenged". Waxworker (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reverting
Do you know, that there is an option to edit the text and change it to something more neutral ether than reverting the ALL edits, including very informative and useful? Like mentioned civs. No, you just reverting it all leaving the article in that state with no clarification. English is not my native, but if you played Tale of the Dragon you know what I'm talking about. It may be my weak side to express things in encyclopedic terms, just edit it and help improving! Orange-kun (talk) 18:47, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Idekaya Incident
Hello, you recently reverted my change for the Idekaya incident page where I mention its depiction in Like a Dragon: Ishin!. However, the description I gave seems on par with other examples in that category, so I'm not entirely sure what else I would need to do? 2603:6010:F3F0:19C0:DC:129F:843E:6D42 (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@2603:6010:F3F0:19C0:DC:129F:843E:6D42: - The rest of the 'In fiction' section was similarly unsourced, and I've removed it for that reason. Please see MOS:POPCULT, which states that "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by summarizing its coverage in reliable secondary or tertiary sources", and must "cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance". Reliable sources would need to be cited specifically talking about the Ikedaya incident in the game in depth. Waxworker (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WikiNYC: 3/14 Hacking Night + 3/16 Queens Name Explorer
All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person, you should be vaccinated and be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate.
@TheTrumpetOrchestra: - You added that "Notably, Wayne Bergeron can be heard on the lead trumpet in this soundtrack" - 'notably' suggests that his performance was specifically noted in reviews, and his website isn't really a good source for that. None of the reviews I checked mentioned him. Neither of the links to his site say that he played lead trumpet on the soundtrack, the biography one says that he played "featured trumpet solos" on The Incredibles, not necessarily lead. It seems odd to note Wayne specifically if reliable secondary sources don't - the article doesn't list everybody in the orchestra. See Help:Referencing for beginners for a guide to citing sources, but this doesn't seem notable to me. Waxworker (talk) 05:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's notable about him being lead on the soundtrack is that he's one of the greatest trumpet players of all time, and this soundtrack was essentially written for him. While there's nothing on the internet that specifically says he played lead on the soundtrack, it's always implied given his reputation with Maynard Ferguson and given that he's a lead player that he will have played lead on the soundtrack. And if you listen to the soundtrack, you can hear that it is Wayne playing the lead part on the soundtrack. However, I understand your objections for removing this even if I don't agree with them. TheTrumpetOrchestra (talk) 05:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If somebody out there really, really needs to know that the company currently known as JackBox Games, which previously released You Don't Know Jack under the name Jellyvision, was also known as Learn Television before doing anything anybody's heard of, they can read about it on the company's page. Your attitude of reverting first and asking questions later (and assuredly not reading the actual pages or edits) is perfectly representative of the pinheaded process-over-people culture on this site that has kept the number of editors stagnant while the site balloons. 75.129.203.176 (talk) 20:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bard's Tale
Hiya, I saw that you rolled back my edit of The Bard's Tale (1985 video game) regarding the gameplay. Technically you're correct that the addition was "unsourced". But given that the issue at hand is a technical feature of the program, I would appreciate a suggestion as to how such information can be sourced? I certainly do feel that the peculiar saving routine needs to be mentioned as it essentially turned every sortie from the Adventurer's Guild into an "iron man" game where you needed to make sure you can make it back, and fans frequently cited the resulting need to manage resources during dungeon exploration as an important if not defining aspect of the game. Frabartolo Ringril (talk) 07:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Frabartolo Ringril: - Per WP:BURDEN, "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". Reviews already on the article could be looked over to see if they discuss this, and added as inline cites - two and a bit paragraphs seems like WP:GAMECRUFT though, specific exploits in particular seems unnecessary to note. I think one sentence under gameplay saying that you have to return to the Adventurer's Guild to save character progress would be sufficient, with specific discussion/criticism of the save system by reliable sources under reception. Waxworker (talk) 04:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mirabelle plums...
Hi, for sure I didn't provide a reliable source...
What I wrote was and is correct...
My mind in writing was some RUBBISH contained in the following, not all of it but some ...
"Mirabelle plums are extremely popular in Germany where they grow both wild and cultivated, primarily in the south and southwest. Mirabelle plums are enjoyed fresh or as various kinds of mirabelle cakes, liquor, preserves, and canned fruit.
In Spain it grows in Galicia, in O Rosal, a valley in the south of the province of Pontevedra to which it was introduced in the mid-twentieth century by Xosé Sánchez García and where it has acclimated to perfection. In Galicia, it is consumed fresh, but it is also used to manufacture preserves and liqueurs. It is also naturalized in the Ebro Valley in parts of Zaragoza, Teruel, Lleida and Tarragona, and can be found near rivers, irrigation canals and road ditches. In Aragon mirabelle plums are called cascabeles.
In England, mirabelles grow both wild and cultivated in Essex, and there are yellow, orange and red varieties in Maylandsea and at Alresford in Hampshire. There are also red, yellow and orange varieties that formed the boundary hedge to an Orchard in Sheringham Norfolk. The orchard was developed into housing in the late 1960s so the hedge is thought be up to 100 years old. The Metz variety grows wild in Suffolk at Leathes' Ham, near Oulton Broad. One tree can also be found growing wild in North West England in Liverpool, and several may be found in the Buckinghamshire town of Milton Keynes. Red and yellow varieties have also been found recently in an ancient hedgerow just outside Northampton. A lone tree found in a nature area in Hucknall, Nottinghamshire produced a massive crop in 2015. Several mirabelles have also been seen in East Ashling hedgerow fields near Chichester West Sussex. The mirabelle is also found in hedgerows in Sutton-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire and on the Millfied Golf Course, Lincolnshire.
They are likewise found in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia both wild and cultivated, often at roadsides. In the United States, trees dating back to the 1940s are still producing fruit in residential neighborhoods in Tamalpais Valley, just north of San Francisco."
He/she/it who wrote that passage didn't provide a reliable source...
so I chose to use my artistic freedom and write what I wrote...
This (MY) passage contains NO falsehood whatsoever AND I didn't provide a reliable source...
To conclude...my 62 worth of text needs a reliable source !?!?
@178.147.112.250: - Per WP:BURDEN, "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". A reliable source is necessary for verification. Unsourced content may be challenged and removed at any time - I've removed some of the other unsourced content from the article. Waxworker (talk) 20:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was the producer of Fighter Duel and Fighter Duel 2 for Philips Media and Infogrames, and my additions are based on multiple sources that are not on the 'net. I work directly with Matt Shaw from Jaeger Software (creator of Fighter Duel) on this content. As I said clearly in a note to my edits, citations will be forthcoming. It's not like the current page had good sourcing as it already had incorrect info (implying that Fighter Duel was available only in Europe.)
@Jimby000: - Unsourced content may be challenged and removed at any time - sources should be added at the same time as the prose so they can be used to verify the content added. Editing an article about a game you were involved in making seems like a conflict of interest - see WP:COI. Directly editing articles about something you have a personal relationship to is generally discouraged. Waxworker (talk) 19:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. So my sources for the edits on the Benkei page were the games themselves. I'm not sure if I should just cite some youtube footage of said games as that's the best source that I can think of. Thoughts? I know Benkei does appear in those games and footage would definitely prove it. 76.144.163.45 (talk) 03:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@76.144.163.45: - Youtube is a generally unreliable source per WP:RSPYT - MOS:POPCULT also states that "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by summarizing its coverage in reliable secondary or tertiary sources" and that "A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance". Reliable sources other than the games themselves would be necessary for verification and to show the appearances are notable. Waxworker (talk) 03:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@NewAnimationMan: - Please see WP:BURDEN - reliable sources are necessary for verification, and the onus is on the editor adding content to provide sources for the information. Also see WP:NOTTVGUIDE - lists of things aired on a channel are not meant to list everything, only "major events, promotions or historically significant program lists". I think that the entire list of programs should be removed except for South Park, due to having a source and having a notable event surrounding it. Waxworker (talk) 03:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please consider reverting your revert. Go to Companies House then click on the Filing History for JONATHAN ADAMS AND PARTNERS ARCHITECTS LIMITED and then click on the PDF for 17 September 2013 "Incorporation Model articles adopted", then scroll down to the 6th page under Director with a Date of Birth as 22/07/1961. Any problems, please let me know. SethWhales talk18:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Waxworker: IMHO Companies House is one of the best sources, as it is a HM Government website and it would be illegal for the Director to falsify their DOB or any other information. On gov.uk it states "If you do not file your statement within 14 days of the end of your review period, your company and its officers may be prosecuted. Your company may also be struck off the register" I think this implies that the statement must be correct otherwise the company may be prosecuted. SethWhales talk18:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Seth Whales: - I'm saying it may not be suitable to use because it is a government website. WP:BLPPRIMARY states that "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses" - I'm not saying that the DOB on Companies House may be inaccurate, I'm saying that it may be unsuitable as it relies on government records. If sources other than government records don't cover it, I don't think it should be on the article due to WP:BLPPRIVACY concerns. Waxworker (talk) 18:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Waxworker: Information on Companies House is Public Domain. I note that Companies House does not now use the full DoB due to possible I/D theft. However WP:BLPPRIMARY also states Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public. Therefore, as I have found his DoB, anyone could do the same. If he wanted his full DoB removed, I'm sure Companies House would remove it if requested as per UK GDPR which gives individuals "the right to object to the processing of their personal data in certain circumstances".SethWhales talk19:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Seth Whales: - I do not think the DOB in this case is "widely published by reliable sources", and WP:BLPPRIMARY discouraging the use of government public records for personal information in biographies seems very clear. Waxworker (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Serious Sam 4 level titled "In Carcassonne" is "unsourced" in articles "Carcassonne" and "Cité de Carcassonne"
Can you please elaborate on your revertion, why Serious Sam 4 level titled "In Carcassonne" cannot be mentioned in articles Carcassonne and Cité de Carcassonne as you wrote this is "unsourced"? I don't understand what do you expect, as in Carcassonne several other games are mentioned and none of them are "sourced". Why didn't you revert/delete any of these? Do you need an official confirmation from the game company about the level, a reference to other Wikipedia-like websites where the levels are described or what exactly? 85.253.80.86 (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@85.253.80.86: - Per WP:BURDEN, reliable sources are necessary for verification, and the onus is on the editor adding content to provide a source for it. MOS:POPCULT states that "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by summarizing its coverage in reliable secondary or tertiary sources" and that "A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance". Reliable sources discussing the level and its cultural impact in depth would be necessary for verifiability and to demonstrate that the appearance is notable. I've removed the other unsourced content from Carcassonne - unsourced content may be challenged and removed at any time. Waxworker (talk) 19:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted edits
Hi and thank you for writing to me. May I ask? How come antoniogenna.net is not considered a reliable source? We commonly use it on the Italian Wikipedia on virtually all articles about voice actors, a topic on which it is practically the main source of information, and it often receives data directly from dubbing studios in Italy (professionals also tend to visit it to keep up to date). On the other end, is IMdB considered a reliable source? That's where I found the film roles I had added to the articles about Stefano De Sando and Gino La Monica.--Tespiano (talk) 14:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tespiano: - 'Antoniogenna.net' appears to be a WP:BLOG - I was unable to find any discussion of it in reliable sources, nor proof of getting "information directly from dubbing studios in Italy (professionals also tend to visit it to keep up to date)". IMDB is an unreliable source per WP:IMDB as it is WP:USERGENERATED. Waxworker (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chiara Ferrari from University of Texas Pressdescribes (page 140)* Antonio Genna as: "an invaluable online resource, kept up to date with the latest information about the industry practitioners, conferences, dubbing studios and so forth. The site is a key source for both scholars and practitioners interested in curent information about dubbing in Italy." It is not a blog (it also features a blog, but the pages I had linked don't belong to the blog section) and sees professional contributors, such as Nunziante Valoroso, an expert who also works in the Italian dubbing industry, mainly for Disney. As you can see in the main page, professionals are requested to email them to update their pages or point out mistakes. It is not a user-generated site. It also features a bibliography, which is the source of various information featured on the website. However, why did you also undo some of my contributions on Roberto Pedicini's page that had nothing to do with antoniogenna.net? Such as this, this or this?
@Tespiano: - Based on what the book says Antoniogenna.net seems fine then - I've partially undone my revert on Roberto Pedicini, removing some unsourced roles. Waxworker (talk) 18:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
James Baxter
Hello Waxworker,
Awhile ago, I added The Boss Baby as a list of credits that James Baxter had done, but you removed it stating it was unsourced.
He is on the Boss Baby IMDb page, he is listed in the animation department section.
I couldn't find anything on Google, but thanks for finding some magazines. I'll add them to the article later. I thought archive.org was only for website archiving, so it's useful to know I can look for other things there. StreetcarEnjoyer(talk)16:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@StreetcarEnjoyer: - Archive.org gave 2000+ results for "Voodoo Castle" in text contents - I only quickly looked through the first few hundred results, so there's likely more good coverage buried alongside the brief mentions in catalogs/ads flooding what's there. Waxworker (talk) 17:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, is it only the IMDB links that are considered unreliable? I'd love to revert my edits back and provide a more reliable reference for all her awards. Tsukushiii (talk) 22:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now I want to know why you gave me the level 3 warning, not the level 1 warning. (I was not familiar with the rules for linking). This was different than the earlier warning about adding unsourced content (which you gave the level 2). Cyber the tiger (talk) 14:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CyberTheTiger: - You already had a level 1 warning for disruptive editing from another editor and a level 2 warning for unsourced content from me - using a level 3 warning despite it being a different kind of issue seemed apt. Waxworker (talk) 17:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I spent most of the day yesterday expanding a tiny, out of date stub article, that just had 3 short paragraphs describing my financial game Wall Street Raider, which has paid users in 119 countries, and which I have self-published since 1990. The existing stub just mentioned my name, a sentence about what the game is about, and the fact it was published by a (long-defunct) publisher in 1989. So I expanded the article, explaining the various features of the game in some detail and correcting an error in the brief stub article, without touting the simulation in any way. However, my changes have been removed, since I didn't link to a source. How can I do that when I AM the source, both author and publisher? This is insane. I guess it's not possible for the creator of a product to describe it on Wikipedia. Never mind.... Better to let people find out about it in many places elsewhere on the web. I really hate mindless bureaucracies. WSRaider (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WSRaider: - Please see WP:COI - directly editing articles in which you have personal involvement is discouraged. Coverage in secondary reliable sources (e.g. gaming news, magazines) is required for verification per WP:BURDEN. A list of reliable/unreliable gaming news sources determined by previous consensus may be found at WP:VG/RS. Much of the gameplay description you added also read promotionally rather than a neutral description of the game. Waxworker (talk) 00:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stanley
I have the episodes in German for Stanley and that's where I got the writer's names, idk how to properly source it, but please do not revert it again. If you're curious how I've got that, the entire series is available in German on Amazon and Apple TV, and in French on Apple TV VGPCVGCP (talk) 05:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A question regarding sources
Is it okay to cite a Wikipedia article of a show's episodes as a source? Any other sources don't seem very reliable as they are Wikia/Fandom. MikeEviscerate (talk) 00:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did try checking the sources for that episode's information. A summary of the episode's plot was NOT provided in the source. (But a different disc source was mentioned elsewhere.) So, I don't know if that portion can even be considered a reliable source.
It did, however, cite some Amazon pages for disc releases. So, are those appropriate?
Okay, never mind, Wikipedia warns against Wikipedia references. Though, I did manage to cite an official source. So, no problem any more MikeEviscerate (talk) 01:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MikeEviscerate: - Please see MOS:POPCULT, which states that "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by summarizing its coverage in reliable secondary or tertiary sources ... A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance". The sources added for much of the pop culture section don't discuss Mare Tranquillitatis in depth, only in passing/just using the name - I've removed most of the entries. Amazon also isn't a great source, and a official source for Log Horizon is a primary source and doesn't show that the appearance is notable. Waxworker (talk) 07:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Revert of Gladiator Sword of Revenge & Source
Hey there you dobt the source I used. Schnittberiche is the biggest german site that talks about censoing in videogames, music and movies. The sources are the two part compareson of these two versions I wrote in there. See the source: https://www.schnittberichte.com/schnittbericht.php?ID=3417 What is more reliable than a source actually talking about that 2 versions exist and goes thrugh all differences in them? DJ Kaito (talk) 13:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the Quick Draw article there was major inaccuracy, I support the right and correct things, Don M's Yowp blog is reliable because he actually was friends with Late Historian Earl Kress. From, Frenemie LilPuPut. Littlepuput8 (talk) 20:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vandalism
Hi how are you? Listen, I'm sorry if I bother you, I'm writing to you because you are already aware of the situation. The IP that changes the dates of video games is back and is also a troll accusing me of vandalism, can anything be done? I'm talking about 2.196.186.69 (Madden NFL 2005) --WaxworkerT 07:17, 18 May 2024 (CEST) 2.196.186.69 (talk) 07:24, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! Apologies on the missed citation, I meant to do so but I promptly forgot. I do have a source however, and it's the official DNEG website here. I'll try to update it myself but if not, at least I've provided the source link here.
Hi there! I noticed that you reverted/undo-ed my addition of Richard Tatum's voice role in the 2024 anime film "My Oni Girl" just by stating that its "unsourced". Why? The majority of his other VA roles (including "Cagaster of an Insect Cage") had no reference sources to begin with yet was added anyway.-Prince Silversaddle (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Prince Silversaddle: - Please see WP:BURDEN - the onus is on an editor adding content to provide a source for it, and unsourced content may be challenged and removed at any time. There already being unsourced content on the article isn't a reason to add more. Waxworker (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Morgan Garrett
What was the point of archiving my edit of her role in the Fairy Tail series even if it was unreferenced? There was clearly another role of hers that wasn't referenced and it's still present. Nonetheless you can look her character up on the Fairy Tail wiki and it displays her. JamTop1105 (talk) 03:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, another one of her roles was unsourced, yet remains, what's the difference with my edit?! And it's not a fan wiki, it's an official wiki, not to mention, how are they NOT reliable when they serve the same purpose as the real Wikipedia?! JamTop1105 (talk) 03:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Waxworker keep The Adventures of Peter Pan on [3] as you can see from illustrations of Neverland in [4] Nippon's website it is floating in the sky also this website that shows actual illustrations taken from the anime [3] (User talk:CSOOCS) 23:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC) if it's un-sourced then specify and I will resolve it[reply]
@CSOOCS: - Coverage in secondary sources discussing this would be necessary for verification and to show that it is notable - as well as to verify the claim that it is "presumably an allegory for Takaamagahara". The official site for the series isn't a suitable source for this. Zerochan is an image board and not a reliable source, and the image you linked is noted as being fanart, not official art. Waxworker (talk) 23:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(User talk:CSOOCS) Waxworker What would you call a reliable source then? What website should I look for that is acceptable? 00:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
(User talk:CSOOCS) Waxworker Here is a anime planet that shows an image of Neverland in it [7] Here's a genuine image from ebay [8] I removed all trace "presumably an allegory for Takaamagahara" because I can't find anything for it in english 00:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya! You deleted my changes to Matthew Porretta's page saying I didn't provide a reliable source, but most of the other things listed in his filmography don't have sources, either. IMDB is listed as unreliable for wikipedia, but I'm assuming a screenshot of him in said media isn't considered reliable either, nor would a screenshot of the credits? Would reviews of the media that mention him work? I will attempt to add some sources, but it seems counterproductive to delete information that can be independently verified by simply looking at the media itself just because there isn't a "reliable" secondhand source on the internet. Annachibi2 (talk) 00:31, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Annachibi2: - A screenshot of the credits wouldn't be a reliable source unless it was a reliable publication (Variety, Deadline Hollywood, etc) providing the screenshot, as a screenshot taken by someone and hosted on something like Imgur would be WP:USERGENERATED. Reviews of the media mentioning his role would be suitable sources - per WP:BURDEN, the onus is on the editor adding content to provide sources to verify it. Waxworker (talk) 00:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May 2024
Okay, some are proven like Farmer Al Falfa's appearance in Jack's Shack in 1934, also in 2000 B.C. in 1931, that He Dood It Again is from February 5, 1943, and that Super Mouse Rides Again it is from August 6, 1943, in the article it is after July 28 and with the date of June 8, 1943, in the searches you removed I got most of the information from IMDb, some from Wikipedia,These first ones that I warned about were just for you to correct, from what source did you get these dates? Chantillyboy (talk) 00:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I am new to wikipedia and recently made a change to UltraSurf. There was an link on cite [2] which is broken. When a user clicks on the link it redirects you to a blog page named "Proudly Canadian" which totaly irrelevant to UltraSurf which is a VPN. So, I have removed the link and added a reliable source of UltraSurf where a user can get review, download, check features and explore FAQs of UltraSurf. But today when I checked I found that you have reverted the changes and makred it as spam link. For doing this, the broken link came back. As I know according to WikiPedia guidelines, if a link is irrelevant or redirect to a irrelevent page is called spam link. So, I removed that spam link and added relevant link which doesn't go against any WikiPedia guidelines. So, I think it is a mistake. Let me know what you think about it. SJSiam (talk) 12:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SJSiam: - Please see WP:LINKSPAM - the links you added are not to official downloads, repeatedly adding links to the same site has the appearance of attempting to promote the site, and in the case of Cadillacs and Dinosaurs, linking to a pirated version of the game is a copyright issue per WP:COPYLINK. I've also re-removed the spam blog link you removed. Waxworker (talk) 23:29, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the update. I agree that I made a mistake in Cadillacs and Dinosaurs and I apologize for it.
About the official downloads, there are another link in Ultrasurf which is not official download cite [10]. Should I remove it? SJSiam (talk) 04:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonghyunchung: - It is not clear according to what you linked that it is no longer airing on the channel - it's just a TV guide listing "A complete schedule of absolutely everything airing on Discovery Family over the next two weeks" - it could air more than two weeks from now. A reliable source explicitly stating that it is no longer airing on the channel is necessary for verification. Waxworker (talk) 21:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What you just said is an unfair punishment for my good-faith editing. Because Discovery Family removed Baby Looney Tunes for June 2024, it clearly deserves to stay in the list of former programming and should not be put back in the current programming list at this time. Jonghyunchung (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: - This is a recurring issue on this article and the article for the show itself - an IP keeps adding obviously false nonsense about rape and murder to episode descriptions of a cartoon aimed at teenagers. Waxworker (talk) 00:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! Interesting. Now I see it, yes--sorry, but if you, User talk:Eejit43 and User talk:Davemck had indicated a bit more explicitly, I'd have done something about it earlier. I've blocked the (larger) range for a while, and if this ever happens again, please report or notify me, and I'll be happy to semi-protect the article from this big baby. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of United States Christmas television episodes
Hi! I understand the logic behind most of your recent reverts on List of United States Christmas television episodes, but I wasn't quite clear on the most recent undo, which was an anon adding a date to a line where a year was already specified. It seems to me that the date of the broadcast of a television episode wouldn't fall under the four key buckets cited at WP:CHALLENGE, nor have I ever encountered an editor with a desire to source such outside of exceptional cases. Totally understand requiring new entries to the list altogether to have a cited source, but it just feels a little heavy handed to remove such basic and fundamental information that would almost certainly never have its verifiability challenged. Would be interested in discussing a little further. - Wezzo(talk)13:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wezzo: - Per WP:BURDEN a source is necessary for verification - I think that date changes is definitely something that requires a source. Air dates for TV shows is a frequent area of disruption. Waxworker (talk) 16:02, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Thanks for saving Category:Lightning Fish games! A user named Gjs238 removed the category from Adidas miCoach and Get Fit with Mel B and then another user named Explicit requested the category's speedy deletion, I've only been on Wikipedia for less than a year, so I thought they were doing it because it had to be done, but you added the category back to the pages and removed the speedy deletion request, so thanks! MKsLifeInANutshell (talk) 14:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
June 2024
I know I am too late to reply and talk about this issue but still... See, from your user page, it has become very clear to me that you mostly make your contributions to video games on Wikipedia, so, you must be aware of the fact that source indicating a composer of a video game might not be available on the Internet. It might be but not in a proper way. So, all I want to say is, please tell me how to add a reference for the composer of Dinosaur King i. e. Salamander Factory. I once even tried, but, it was not in proper format and things like “<ref>” were visible. So, please help me. Thanks Amogh Tripathi (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know why this edit was reverted. [5] Bugs Bunny obviously appears in the film (small appearance, but the likes of "An Itch in Time" and "Daffy Doodles" aren't any more significant), the image is even used on a Cannes listing for Book Revue. [6] If the film itself isn't a proper source, that's a problem with the entire section, not just my edit. YuckieDuck (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@YuckieDuck: - I've removed the rest of the unsourced 'Cameo appearances' section. In addition to being unsourced, the section seems trivial to note to me - while the Cannes link verifies the cameo, I don't think that it demonstrates that it is notable. Waxworker (talk) 23:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reporting issues to various noticeboards, but there is a recurring issue with you reporting unsourced content issues to AIV which is only for obvious vandalism or obvious spam. Most of your reports do not meet that requirement. I reviewed your most recent 10 reports to AIV, and 9 of them were for unsourced content. Even 1 would be too many, but 9 is out of control. You can report problematic users continuing to make unsourced edits after being warned or blocked to ANI. Or, if the issue is also a BLP violation such as contentious material that is unsourced, you can report it to BLPN. Please do not make further reports of non-vandalism and non-spam issues at AIV. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Quinlan:@ToBeFree: - Pinging ToBeFree for their input as they've previously discussed my AIV reports with me. My understanding is that addition of unsourced content is a form of disruptive editing and is fine to report at AIV for straight-forward issues, like this /64 making persistent unsourced date changes and this IP adding unsourced content after final warning and they've been blocked for disruptive editing four times previously that I reported yesterday. If this is an issue I can make these reports at ANI instead, but I generally think of ANI as the place for complicated issues rather than something that can be summarized in a sentence like at AIV. Waxworker (talk) 13:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is not correct. The criteria for AIV is obvious vandalism or obvious spam. In fact, the scope of AIV doesn't even include subtle vandalism. Unsourced content issues often require a deeper dive into article content and history, sometimes involving citation checks and finding new sources. That is a time-consuming process, a world apart from the type of obvious issues that can be quickly handled at AIV by any administrator without discussion. In contrast, ANI and other noticeboards are designed for non-obvious issues that often require discussion, allow others to contribute, and provide an opportunity for good-faith editors to respond.
In short, reporting unsourced content and other non-obvious issues to AIV diverts attention from handling clear cases of vandalism and spam quickly. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I agree. An IP range that repeatedly adds unsourced content despite final warnings and/or previous blocks (and no communication) doesn't necessarily need to go to ANI. As an admin I can take a 5 second glance at the /64 or /24 contribs and know that a block is required. Kicking it to AN/I is a timesink and I can almost guarantee that the response will be "why aren't you reporting these to AIV?". I think that, like every other admin area, the parameters we feel comfortable taking action in vary and there are many AIV patrolling admins that find such blocks an easy call.-- Ponyobons mots20:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're contradicting the instructions on WP:AIV as well as the AIV guide, instructions that I believe are serving us well. In addition to what I said above, another concern I have is that it's a false economy. Unsourced content reports are often appropriately closed by various administrators, and it doesn't help Wikipedia if those reports disappear into the archive. Even if some cases are relatively straightforward, most of these cases require much more than a 5-second investigation. Acting too hastily without proper investigation can result in unfair warnings and blocks. If ANI is too heavyweight of a venue for reports about users persistently ignoring warnings about unsourced content, then we should have a discussion about how to better address these kinds of reports. I think a case could be made for a separate noticeboard that's somewhere between ANI and AIV in terms of complexity and overhead. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 21:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Waxworker, Ponyo, Daniel Quinlan, thanks for the ping. I'm thankful for every report of disruptive non-obvious-vandalism editing that doesn't end up at AIV, which is in theory dedicated to "obvious vandalism" and "obvious spam" and should never have a backlog because clicking any report there should make every admin rush to the block button. I understand your and Ponyos position, but that isn't the noticeboard's official purpose and I take such reports thinking: "It's not a bureaucracy, the report should probably not be here, sending the reporter elsewhere makes them unhappy and lets the disruption continue for a while, and the easiest way to make everyone happy while improving the encyclopedia is to invest a larger-than-anticipated amount of time into dealing with it so others don't have to". To be fair, I do often end up enjoying dealing with the issue, but the initial thought is "sigh". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please clarify why you continually remove film credits as unsourced that CLEARLY are listed on the imdb page that is one of the only two sources of info linked to the page?! 193.42.0.197 (talk) 10:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do have evidence that WZME's MeTV Toons subchannel is indeed 720p. It shows up in VLC Media Player as such. I use a Hauppauge TV tuner with TVHeadend running on a Pi 4 to receive the channel. How can I use this as a source on the page? Nylix4488 (talk) 23:59, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! This is to let you know that the fact that Keita Okamoto composed music for Pokémon Sword and Shield is sourced, already sourced on Wikipedia. You can check it on its DLC Counterparts. It is mentioned there. Hoping that you will not revert/undo my edit. Amogh Tripathi (talk) 18:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amogh Tripathi: - The articles for the DLC do mention Keita Okamoto, but the credit is similarly unsourced there and not discussed in the body of the article, plus I don't think adding him as a composer for the base game is apt if they only worked on the DLC. A reliable source is necessary for verification and to show that the credit is notable. Waxworker (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I came to know that MobyGames is an unreliable source for video games information from you. But, almost all video game articles take at least some information from MobyGames. Also, MobyGames has an approval system for information I guess. Correct me if I am wrong. And by the way, some information can't be added without MobyGames. Please reply. Amogh Tripathi (talk) 14:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amogh Tripathi: - Information sourced to Mobygames should be removed as it is unreliable. Mobygames is fine as an external link under the 'external links' section, but not as a source. Waxworker (talk) 14:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow seriously? Undoing all my edits... All this information comes from that external link (IMDb) on the pages mentioned. I've been doing it this way for years. I find it bizarre that you are now throwing away my hours of work like this. RuedNL2 (talk) 15:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On most of the pages that I have edited now and you have undone, all that filmography information is usually unsourced and comes from the same external link, IMDb. In addition, some are even literally mentioned in the existing Wikipedia article projects! RuedNL2 (talk) 15:31, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RuedNL2: - Unsourced content may be challenged and removed at any time, and anything sourced to IMDB ought to be removed. Per WP:BURDEN, the onus is on the editor adding content to provide sourcing for verification. Waxworker (talk) 15:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get what you mean. But then it's better to start deleting all those filmographies instead of undoing my edit. Because literally 80% of the pages you undo are unsourced. RuedNL2 (talk) 15:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have already undone some of your edits and provided sources... although I think it is ridiculous because it is often the only source in the entire table. In any case, I thought your motto was "the solution is to improve, not delete", so it would be nice if you could help find the sources instead of just undoing everything easily. RuedNL2 (talk) 16:05, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Waxworker is right in that IMBd should not be used. The Internet is full of sources. (archived via the Wayback Machine and none archived). Stuff like Newspapers.com, ProQuest etc also exist as alternatives. (which can be accessed via the Wikipedia Library) Timur9008 (talk) 16:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get it. But doesn't anyone find it strange that I am being looked at? While adding sourceless projects to a SOURCELESS TABLE? It must be just me. I will provide sources for these edits and then I will withdraw completely for the time being. Cheers RuedNL2 (talk) 16:37, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good evening, I have sourced all the information as best I could. I know some of them aren't the best, but hopefully they're good enough. RuedNL2 (talk) 18:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wicked Workshop
You undid the addition of Multiversus for Wicked Workshop.
They have worked on the game and are listed in the game as a developer.
Hi, I noticed you reverted Zenki in the list and mentioned that www.animenewsnetwork.com is unreliable. May I know how is it unreliable? Looking at its page references, you could see www.animenewsnetwork.com all over there. 122.54.207.156 (talk) 01:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The channel airs WWE too. It's not that hard to read your own pages on wiki and get this info. I repeat wikipedia itself 's got a page of their programming and WWE and TNA 's got to stay on the mbc action main page.
Then before i ve described the satellites where it's broadcasted , but i ll edit it better with satellites websites. Why do you think is not important to explain this stuff? It's important because it describes that is not just a middle east channel but with the right satellite dish it's avalaible in Europe too. I used to watch it from Italy. Nj nick Champion (talk) 03:54, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok i haven't found mbc action tna links at the moment, neither on youtube ( since they ve added wwe instead of tna , probably with time they ve deleted tna links and videos) i haven't even looked for so much, but if you think that another wikipedia page is not a reliable source , you should talk to the other moderators who check that page instead of saying that anyone is not a reliable source on wiki Nj nick Champion (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nj nick Champion: - Youtube is a generally unreliable source per WP:RSPYT unless the channel uploading the video is a reliable source, and I'm unsure what you mean by "you should talk to the other moderators who check that page instead of saying that anyone is not a reliable source on wiki", can you elaborate? Waxworker (talk) 03:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding...
...this,[9] those are two songs which appear in the cartoon (sung by Bea Benaderet and Billy Bletcher, respectively), though not the complete songs, just a few lines. I thought it would be interesting for readers to be able to hear the entire songs from within the article, rather than having to Google them as I did. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 01:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Baseball Bugs: - I don't think having these in the external links section is very beneficial to the reader, and the uploader of the Ella Fitzgerald song doesn't appear reliable. Waxworker (talk) 01:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Sorry, my IP changed after a sudden internet disconnection at work. I am the user you left a talk message to on my old page. I think you were tad unfair in reverting my edits, because on the Joan of Arc television episodes section many have cited IMDb as a reference for the episodes, but you only omitted my edit. I believe that, whilst rightfully removing the unreliable source, you should have kept the additions as act of good faith, since many other users have added unsourced entries (in the other articles' Television adaptations sections, such as Three Little Pigs). The show Manga Fairy Tales of the World indeed has adapted the fairy tales/fables that you have reverted. I hope I can find reliable, accepted sources for such episodes. But so far it seems like only IMDb has these episodes and animenewsnetwork. Above all, I just don't think removing ALL my additions were constructive. Thanks. 220.235.144.134 (talk) 08:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@220.235.144.134: - If no reliable sources discuss the episodes, I don't think they should be on the articles - reliable sources are necessary for verification and to show that the depictions are notable. Please see MOS:POPCULT, which states that "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist ... A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, television show, or other cultural item". I also don't think that there being other content that's unsourced/sourced to unreliable sources is reason to add more. Waxworker (talk) 03:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of progranmes broadcast by Nick Jr. (British and Irish TV channel)
Sorry Waxworker, I made bad edits on that page yesterday, I won't do in again Waxworker.
Dude you really had to ruin my edits of Disney XD Canada, Sidekick (YTV show) and Grossology (YTV show)!!!! unlike YOU, I do my research on stuff!!c revert the edits now!!!
Orphaned non-free image File:Amiga Active Issue 1 October 1999 Issue Cover.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Amiga Active Issue 1 October 1999 Issue Cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
You recently removed and archived my addition to the Ashley Newbrough entry but no other page requires a citation for every addition to the list of credits for an actor, especially those who make multiple movies per year for Great American Family or Hallmark. COBill (talk) 10:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yodels snacks in the movie Welcome to the Dollhouse
My entry to Yodels was removed for not having a source. The source was the actual movie that I was watching at the time. Yodels are in the movie Welcome to the Dollhouse. No source is needed when I'm watching the movie with my own eyes. Theblakex (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Theblakex: - Please see MOS:POPCULT, which states that "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by summarizing its coverage in reliable secondary or tertiary sources ... A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, television show, or other cultural item". A reliable source is necessary for verification and to show that the appearance is notable. Waxworker (talk) 21:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's mentioned several times throughout the movie, so it became obvious. I thought it belonged on the Wikipedia page. Never mind. How do I cite a source for a movie I'm in the middle of watching? Theblakex (talk) 21:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mickey Finn (drugs)
Good day, Waxworker! At 19:03, June 28, 2024, you "Undid revision 1231516245 by 173.218.83.167" citing it as "unsourced." That revision was not my own, but I do appreciate the reference to the MASH episode and think it should be added (without the misspellings and grammatical errors of the original edit, of course). Before doing so, I'd like to ask about sourcing. First, what qualifies as a reliable source when citing lines from television episodes? From the looks of your talk page, many of the "go to" places for movies and shows are referenced as "unreliable". Second, there are numerous references under the "Media" section of the "Mickey Finn (drugs)" article that are also not sourced. Why are those entries allowed to remain but the reference to the MASH episode was not? I have no personal beef with any of this; I just want to make sure my desired addition will not be reverted due to sourcing issues. Thanks! Connah0047 (talk) 11:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Connah0047: - Per MOS:POPCULT, "Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by summarizing its coverage in reliable secondary or tertiary sources ... A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, television show, or other cultural item". A reliable source needs to discuss the cultural impact of the appearance - a non-exhaustive list of reliable/unreliable sources may be found at WP:RSP. The 'Society and culture' section has many unsourced/poorly sourced (e.g. WP:IMDB, WP:GENIUS, etc) entries that could be removed, it's just that nobody's challenged them yet. Waxworker (talk) 07:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, it's me Cre8tivDemby. The guy who added the article about Yoshi from Dolittle (2020) in List of fictional bears. Although I left out a citation, my article should be added back because Yoshi from the movie Dolittle is a fictional bear. I believe you've made a mistake by removing it. Please let me put it back. Thank you. Cre8tivDemby (talk) 15:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing out the omission of a resource regarding Joe Pera's birthday in my recent edit. I have addressed the issue and updated the edit with the necessary information. I appreciate your attention to detail in ensuring accuracy. Jdarias93 (talk) 01:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rtl Kockica
Hello. It's impossible to find the source, so, i do not know really what to do. It was late at night, like 1:00 and i think no one was up at those hours.
I hope you will understand.
If you want to contact me further, we can do it on Discord. The user is l0ll3._
Regards, l0ll3.
(i know im talking a lot, but im trying to be polite) Wikil0ll3a (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikil0ll3a: - A reliable source is necessary for verification per WP:BURDEN - if no reliable sources discuss it, it shouldn't be on the article. I discuss matters with other users on-wiki, not Discord. Waxworker (talk) 03:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you twice reverted the addition of Bonus Tracks to the Free Design album. I do not know the contributor who originally added them, but I added them as a separate section just for the sake of completeness. I see you have reverted my change. I don't really care if the bonus tracks appear or not, but I am curious why you insist that they not be listed. Thanks. Johnwellsking (talk) 14:40, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to tell you this but the note i added in about the episode King Ramses Curse being shown on the VHS tape Scooby Doo And The Alien Invaders is real. And I should know because I have the video and it said so for real. Please let me add that back in and please buy the video on eBay and try to see for yourself. JonHaroldMeyer96 (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Waxworker, it's not worth removing my edit to List of Xbox network games. I have a reliable source, a spreadsheet is being used for getting info on tested games on the Xbox Live revival server project, Insignia. I am also using in-game tests to check out Xbox Live functionality.
None of the other games have a source either, but I am ensuring these are correct too.
Unfortunately, the spreadsheet link must remain private, but if you are keen, I can provide screenshots of all the info, or extract the info into an .xls and use that. 2407:7000:AE1E:700:6CA5:FFD2:F19:B923 (talk) 09:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither comic adaptation referenced had a source quoted either but both are easily verifiable with Google. So why did my edit need to cite one? 0xD34D (talk) 17:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, regarding your deletion of my additions for being unsourced on the WBFE page, I'm interested in knowing how those movies were sourced in the first place. Films like The Pagemaster, Air Bud, and Gumby are listed (which are local WBFE releases by my research), yet they weren't mentioned on their respective Wikipedia pages and it's unsourced on the main WBFE page.
I do have several sources regarding my additions. The production company that worked on those Dutch films, Bos Bros. mentioned Warner Bros. as the main distributor for both "The Flying Liftboy" and "Miss Minoes" on their official website. The trailer for The Flying Liftboy on that site also shows the WBFE logo at the beginning. Does a website like that count as source? So far as I know, it IS an official source related to those films.
@TheDutchArchivist: - The linked sources say "Warner Bros NL" for distribution, not explicitly Warner Bros. Family Entertainment. The linked page for The Flying Liftboy does have a trailer that has the Warner Bros. Family Entertainment logo, but I don't think a logo at the beginning of a Youtube video is a strong enough source showing that the studio's involvement is notable. The rest of the list is similarly unsourced, but onus is on the editor adding content to cite a source verifying the content per WP:BURDEN, and there already being unsourced content isn't a reason to add more. I recommend reading Help:Referencing for beginners for guidance regarding citing sources. Waxworker (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, the video is from the company's official YT page and not a random user, I'm aware of Wikipedia's stance on YouTube. I could bring up those films' old DVD/VHS releases, but I'm not sure if I could find an official source. with that said, I will check out Help:Referencing for beginners and see if I could figure something out in the process. TheDutchArchivist (talk) 17:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pro Evolution Soccer franchise issues
I was trying to add these images too for the wiki page. But I don't know how, because Wikimedia is too complicated. The images are actually, idk how to make it like I made it myself.
@Johnny C Baker: - I don't think that pictures of the covers are in of themselves a source, especially since several of them don't specifically name who's pictured on the cover somewhere on the cover. Reliable sources need to be cited that discuss this - a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games may be found at WP:VG/RS. Uploading additional covers to add to the articles when covers are already in the infobox also seems unnecessary and a fair use concern - see WP:NONFREE for guidelines regarding minimal use of copyrighted content. Waxworker (talk) 18:40, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's hard to find japanese website that literally explain the cover players, you know. Even if there's one, there's a possibility that they no longer exists or their domain was sold. Johnny C Baker (talk) 11:12, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen what you've removed and the reason behind it. Yes, I suppose the fandoms are pretty unreliable, therefore I'll take your advice and keep out of fandom for references. However, when I checked what I had removed, I really didn't remove much. I removed the expand section template (I dont know if I'm allowed to do that! Please educate me about that) as it was fullfilled. I removed some information about the flamethrowers, heat seeking missiles, etc and added them into the Fandom paragraph. So, really, I hadn't removed anything besides the template. Let me know if I'm wrong. Cheers. Ggzion (talk) 04:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ggzion: - Aside from the WP:FANDOM content, the edit also removed the infobox without explanation. Removing maintenance templates when the issue has been dealt with is fine, but in this case the added content was also unreliably sourced so the issue wasn't really resolved. For future reference, a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games may be found at WP:VG/RS. Waxworker (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question about the Wikipedia page of Looney Tunes: Space Race?
Aren't the reliable sources in the "references" section of the wiki? cause if so, "Out of the Space Race - IGN" is already credited, wouldn't that mean I'd have a reliable source for when it was moved from the N64 to the Dreamcast? BoweryBugs (talk) 04:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BoweryBugs: - IGN is a reliable source - see WP:VG/RS for a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games. Please see the previously linked guide to references for guidance regarding citing sources. Waxworker (talk) 05:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Waxworker:- I did read it, I was just wondering. so if I was to make an edit including the development of the game, could I include the fact that it was announced in 1998 and changed consoles due to the IGN articles credited in the refrences? cause that is where I got the information. BoweryBugs (talk) 05:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had Development down (I will look more into the E3 part), I'll also look into gameplay, as it has been a little while since I've played the game. BoweryBugs (talk) 05:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BoweryBugs: - There's plenty of reviews already on the article that could be used for a gameplay section - you could look over what they say about the gameplay and cite them. I recommend reading what the Manual of Style for video games says about writing gameplay sections, and WP:VGSCOPE's list of 'Inappropriate content' for video game articles. Also, I looked over the added development section and it's good, though when citing a source that's already on the article rather than copying the entire reference again you add 'ref name=whatever' to the beginning of the original reference and add that as an inline cite as needed - I've removed the duplicate refs and replaced them with the named references. Hopefully that's a good example of how that works, if you have any other questions about in-line citations you could ask at the WP:TEAHOUSE. Waxworker (talk) 18:31, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BoweryBugs: - You add 'ref name=typewhateverhere' at the beginning of the original reference, replacing 'typewhateverhere' with a short name for the ref that describes it - the edit I made to Looney Tunes Space Race removing the duplicate refs and replacing them with the ref names in diff form here provides an example. Waxworker (talk) 02:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My edits for several episodes of season two have been rejected because "YouTube is not a reliable source." I can't understand why some writer credits remain, but all mine get reverted to 'unknown.' Many episodes have recently been uploaded to YouTube with the credits intact and I am literally copying those credits from the videos to the Wikipedia page. Granitoons (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But these are literally the credits as they appear. I can't think of a more credible source that the actual episodes. I can link to the actual episodes if needs be. They are unedited broadcasts from 1992. Granitoons (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Waxworker But these are literally the credits as they appear. I can't think of a more credible source that the actual episodes. I can link to the actual episodes if needs be. They are unedited broadcasts from 1992. Granitoons (talk) 14:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Granitoons: - MOS:TVEPISODELIST states that "Episode title, writers, directors, episode numbers, airdates, production codes, and viewership numbers must be reliably sourced, either from the opening/closing credits or from secondary sources (preferred, see WP:RSPRIMARY)". The opening credits could be used as a source, but it doesn't seem that the all of the show has been released on VHS/DVD or any streaming platforms, and episodes uploaded on Youtube are both unreliable and a copyright concern per WP:COPYLINK, so I think that reliable secondary sourcing is necessary for verification since part of the series practically seems like lost media in terms of availability. Waxworker (talk) 12:58, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On removing Pigsy Eats Watermelon at Cutout Animation
I added that info because of the fact they are involved with the movies and tv shows that I mentioned it's true I would look it up online such as A 2nd Chance does have the sequels like the movie A Second Chance Rivals, and Gymnatisics Academy Red Polar Bear Ranger (talk) 06:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Privatesteverogers: - TV Guide is a reliable source per WP:RSP, and it would be fine to re-add the credit with that as a source. Pirated copies of the documentary online should never be linked to as they are a copyright concern per WP:COPYLINK, so 'upmovies' should never be used. 'Entertainment.ie' lists at the bottom of the page that it has content taken from The Movie Database, which is WP:USERGENERATED and unreliable, so that also shouldn't be used. Waxworker (talk) 00:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure what you mean by “unsourced” as there are already sources indicating what I added to this article. I don’t understand, thanks in advance. AlienEditor (talk) 03:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AlienEditor: - The 'Junction' role added to filmography was unsourced - also an in-line ref clarifying that the early life section was sourced from the 'The News and Observer' ref would also be necessary, as it appeared unsourced before I looked over the refs as there was no in-line citation. Waxworker (talk) 07:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shlomicatz: - This appears to just be a ROM download site and doesn't seem like a reliable source - see WP:VG/RS for a non-exhaustive list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games. Reliable sourcing is necessary for verification and to show that this is notable. Waxworker (talk) 13:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jason Griffith
I believe my edits to Jason Griffith's page do not to be cited, as they were almost entirely grammatical and formatting based; for the little info I did add regarding Toonzai, that was a logical assumption based on statements taken from its article on this very wiki. 131.125.11.1 (talk) 16:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am fairly new to wiki editing, sorry for my mistake. Would google play store page be considered a reliable source? That's where I found the release date.
Буслянё (talk) 06:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to throw something out here. I've noticed you've reverted all my edits in relation to music and songs as I cite YouTube as a source. While I understand your concern that it isn't a reliable source, the song clearly has been recorded and uploaded to the site. Why is it not notable enough to be in a Wikipedia article? I just want to know more in-depth reasoning for these reversions.
@SSBelfastFanatic: - If something isn't covered by reliable sources, it shouldn't be mentioned on the article. Please see WP:BURDEN, which states that "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". Also see the essay Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. Waxworker (talk) 18:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ArthurRead1976: - Neither release date is sourced on the articles. I haven't looked into this in depth, but from a cursory look at Mobygames's directory of reviews it lists reviews from late 1993, and Kultboy includes two reviews from November 1993 - Video Games and Man!ac (which also includes a screenshot of the game showing a copyright date of 1993). I think in absence of sources explicitly stating a release date just the copyright date of 1993 is fine. Waxworker (talk) 15:26, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wish you wouldn’t remove the information I’ve added about CBC Kids during 2003-7. This era of CBC Kids has unfortunately become extremely obscure and hard to find, and I’m trying to bring more attention to it by expanding the article in the hopes that it will help it get found. 76.104.229.144 (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there, Waxworker. I wanted to reach out, as I think you should maybe reconsider your approach for dealing with unsourced additions. Yes; we absolutely need sources for new content - especially with credits - but you have been reverting contributions and occasionally reaching out to the editors after. Maybe instead tag the pages and reach out to the editors, giving them the opportunity to course-correct first? You're totally within your right to simply revert and that will be good for page quality & edit counts, but it also comes across as very abrasive & aggressive. BOTTO (T•C)18:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Botto: - I think that newly added unsourced content is best resolved by reverting and warning, and tagging unsourced content as citation needed is best used for unsourced content that's been present on an article for ages and has gone unchallenged. I think that the level 1 warning template for unsourced content, while kind of impersonal (as templates are), doesn't seem aggressive and links to helpful resources for new editors about Wikipedia's verifiability policy and guides to citing sources. The content removed may always be restored with reliable sourcing, as the warning encourages. When new editors take the time to do so I often thank them for it. Waxworker (talk) 13:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can find many reviews and descriptions of the game online. I do not add sources because every time I tried in the past, they were deleted: the Wikipedia rules on sourcing are absurd to me, and I won't work hard on stuff that will be deleted. I suggest you move the deleted content to the talk page so a wiki nerd can do the sourcing in the way you require. 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:11AD:D503:B3EE:77F9 (talk) 23:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nero Wolfe
Can you please explain why you removed the Julius Katz addition I added to the pastiches? You can see from this link that 2 of the Julius Katz stories won Ellery Queen Readers Awards (2010, 2013):
I wanted to add it because it deserves to be there, but I'm washing my hands of it. MrOllike is an ahole--I remember now that he would not let my Frankenstein novel Monster be added as a derivative work even though it got some serious critical acclaim, including making Booklist and WBURs best horror novel list. Anyway, I asked The Wolfe Pack to add it if anyone there has a Wikipedia account and feels it should be there--and given their previous writeups of my Julius Katz stories, the 2nd part won't be an issue. DaveZeltserman (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tigbanua
Hi, the Tigbanua is listed and cited on the Buso page I linked to. If their source is not reliable I can try find others, but would those sources not need to be requirements for the Buso page rather than this one? MothMariner (talk) 08:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MothMariner: - Wikilinks are not a reliable source per WP:USERGENERATED, which states that "In particular, a wikilink is not a reliable source". The Dungeons & Dragons monster book doesn't seem like a great source as it's about it in the context of the game rather than mythology, and the reliability of 'The Aswang Project' is questionable per this previous RSN discussion. Waxworker (talk) 22:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Look, Earth to Waxworker. Why are you removing GamingOnLinux citations from various articles when this big page, Video games and Linux, itself also has so many (over 60, I think) citations to the GOL website???
It is so contradictory, your approach.
@ObiKKa: - Gaming On Linux is an unreliable source per WP:VG/RS, and Reddit is a generally unreliable WP:USERGENERATED source per WP:RSPREDDIT. Removing every Gaming On Linux ref from that article would be a massive overhaul that I'm not personally interested in undertaking, while reverting newly added content sourced to it is more doable - also an article relying heavily on a single source isn't great. While Reddit is generally unreliable, Archive.ph generally saves Reddit threads fine when Archive.org doesn't. Waxworker (talk) 20:21, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the mention on the alternative archive tool link, and explaining how editing old links works on pages here and who do it.
BTW, let me show you this new post on mastodon GOL's founder Liam Dawe made that links to his references page.
It shows a continuing list of sources that his website was used by many different, big media outlets for articles/research. And tell me do you agree with Wikipedia's assessment that his website is too flaky to be cited? Maybe you can show the refs list to others to bring it back into reliable or semi reliable category? ObiKKa (talk) 20:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ObiKKa: - The discussion about this source is from 2016 and had minimal participation (the 'consensus' seems to be the opinion of one editor), and most of the mentions in other sources on the 'References' page are after 2016 - consensus can change and it may be good to reassess the site at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources with input from other editors. I'm still personally wary of it as a source since the 'about us' page says that "content is 99%" from one author. Waxworker (talk) 21:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you remove all edits and all reflinks including important platform mention (eg. iOS, Mac) from the AirAttack HD page (maybe the second title's page too)?
You're so annoying, always spying on my work. I'm furious. No wonder Wikipedia is so stagnant and missing so much information.
According to your reason, you only needed to remove the GameFAQs link(s) and nothing else. Also plenty other pages here have Reddit links. What's wrong with them? ObiKKa (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ObiKKa: - Reddit is a generally unreliable WP:USERGENERATED source per WP:RSPREDDIT. Storefront listings also aren't a great source, and the info about the game being delisted "likely after 2017 or probably by 2021" isn't explicitly stated in the sources and seems like WP:OR. I've previously asked for other editors' input at WP:VG regarding getting approximate delist dates from archive links, and others agreed delisting shouldn't be noted unless reliable sources discuss it, see the discussion here. Waxworker (talk) 15:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you explain what I did wrong, so that I will avoid a similar mistake in the future?
You wrote that my content was unsourced, but I thought I put in a source, this one: [17]. Is it not a valid source? If not, can you explain me why? --Abacos (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Abacos: - The release timeline and info about Solo Crisis is unsourced - in-line citations are necessary for verification. The reliability of 'Gaming.Moe' is noted as 'inconclusive' per WP:VG/RS, but seems fine to me as a source due to the author, Heidi Kemps, having a lot of industry experience and having written for several reliable gaming websites as noted in the discussion regarding the site's reliability. Waxworker (talk) 23:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answer. Not everybody likes to explain things. Subsequently, can I restore the paragraph about Soul Blazer with its source? Also, since there is almost no information about Solo Crisis in the west, are sources in Japanese acceptable? --- Abacos (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Abacos: - Soul Blazer isn't explicitly described as a spinoff or said to be in the same universe as ActRaiser in the cited source, it says "SoulBlazer is actually related to ActRaiser and is in many ways a sort of a prequel to ActRaiser. Now, the connection is a pretty distant one, but it’s there", so I don't think it should be described as a spinoff or said to be in the same universe unless a reliable source explicitly says that, but quoting the section of the article seems fine. Sources don't need to be in English to be considered reliable, see WP:NONENG, though I recommend looking over WP:VG/RS to see if the source is listed there. Waxworker (talk) 21:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shkuru Afshar: - See WP:YOUTUBE - I don't think that linking to these videos is very helpful to the reader, and Youtube video essays in general (unless maybe if they are a subject matter expert and have previously published work in reliable sources relevant to the subject per WP:SPS) do not strike me as as something we should be linking to for further information on a topic on Wikipedia. Waxworker (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Calling YouTube videos "essays in general" is your personal opinion. I have seen many YouTube videos that are not published in other platforms or sources being used as references on Wikipedia. I recommend you to watch Ahoy videos and his references. Shkuru Afshar (talk) 06:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shkuru Afshar: - Youtube is a generally unreliable source per WP:RSPYT, unless the channel is reliable (e.g. IGN or GameSpot's official channels). I didn't say that Youtube videos are "essays in general", I was saying that Youtube video essays, are in general not something that I think should be linked to on articles. Waxworker (talk) 09:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shkuru Afshar: - I know that the guidance for external links is different than that of references, I was just clarifying that Youtube is unreliable as a source since you mentioned Youtube "being used as references on Wikipedia". WP:YOUTUBE, as I linked before, is specifically about Youtube external links. Waxworker (talk) 10:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Invitation to participate in a research
Hello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
@81.152.18.78: - The site doesn't appear to be mentioned in reliable sources, and the site has a disclaimer stating that the site "does not make any warranties about the completeness, reliability, and accuracy of this information" in regards to information on the website. I do not think it is a reliable source. Waxworker (talk) 21:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you recently messaged me saying you've reverted and archived my changes saying I didn't provide a reliable source.
I did the graphics for Special Forces, had significant input into the games design and co-owned the development company that developed the game (Sleepless Knights).
I'm a n00b with wikipedia, how do I add myself as a "reliable source"? AnthonyRosbottom (talk) 10:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But some of the information in the article I edited was incorrect. Am I supposed to leave incorrect information in an article?
This line is 100% incorrect
"The player needs to plan the mission carefully since the player does not control the operatives directly. Instead the player gives the soldiers orders similar to the game Commandos."
@AnthonyRosbottom: - I've removed the line in question, partially since it is also unsourced. While discouraged from editing the article directly, you may propose changes on the talk page - see WP:COIEDIT. While removing unsourced content that may be incorrect is a fairly non-controversial change, adding content needs reliable sources - see WP:VG/RS for a non-exhaustive list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games. Waxworker (talk) 11:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Showtaro Morikubo
A couple months ago you removed my addition to the Showtaro Morikubo page. I added a credit for Rockman X Legacy Collection, which was removed by you for "no source". Let me explain the credit, since you hastily removed it with no discussion.
Rockman X Legacy Collection is a collection of past Rockman X games, but it does feature its own unique "game" in the form of X Challenge mode. In this bonus mode, you play as Rockman X exactly as he appears in Rockman X6, including Morikubo's voice recordings.
As well as that, X appears as a boss, which uses recordings re-used from X's appearance as a boss from Rockman X5. The same goes for the other character he voiced in X5, Dynamo. Dynamo is present as a boss in X Challenge, and uses the same exact audio recordings. Removing the credit for Dynamo is even more egregious because Dynamo has only ever been voiced by Morikubo.
There is no source, aside from the game itself. What do you need, a side-by-side comparison of the voice clips? Anybody with ears can tell it's Morikubo's old recordings. They're identical.
The reason why I added her was I had just watched the NCIS episode "The Trouble With Hal" and thought I recognized her, so I restarted the episode and saw her name and then looked her up. This information was not on Wikipedia, so I added it. If you want to verify it yourself, watch season 22 episode 3 of NCIS and you'll see her name in the opening credits and then see when you watch it. Other than I SAW her name AND her when I watched it, I wouldn't know where to find a citation. Autotech659 (talk) 00:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. You already gave a small feedback in the page where added information about remakes of the game. If this is for the links, I can find others, I just wanted to include a link per-platform. If this is for notable/relevant information, who I can measure it? To my eyes it is relevant to mention about remakes of something as part of an encyclopedia (I have seen in many other articles/pages and it is very common to mention forks/remakes in software). I am not an expert so a kind of feedback about how to evaluate myself when something can be added or not would be great. Thanks AyubuZimbale (talk) 09:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AyubuZimbale: - Linking to downloads of the game seems like a WP:COPYLINK issue as I said, and doesn't indicate notability. WP:MOSVG states that "It is usually inappropriate to mention or list homebrews and fan remakes of games" unless reliable sources discuss them, stating that some fangames "have achieved notability because of their far-reaching impact on the game(s) on which they are based" - WP:VG/RS has a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games. Waxworker (talk) 23:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
@86.130.15.246: - It does not appear to be a reliable source. Its 'about us' page gives the wrong name of the site for some reason, and it has a disclaimer page stating that the site "does not make any warranties about this information’s completeness, reliability, and accuracy. Any action taken upon the information you find on this website (Oldflamescandles) is strictly at your own risk". Other venues for inquiring about source reliability are WP:RSN and the WP:TEAHOUSE. Waxworker (talk) 12:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, why reverted my addition here? I do believe it is good addition about the game size.
If you want a source I can put here the screen from my PC as well to show))) D-lotti-pt-xxi (talk) 11:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of actors who played Santa Claus - David Harbour
I think removing the addition I made was a mistake. The "citation" is the link to the Wikipedia article for the Violent Night movie staring David Harbour as Santa in the 2nd column. See: Violent Night
No. I have reverted to the last version of the page that seemed to have consensus, and protected the page until the both of you discuss your edits on the talk page. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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.
I See This In Nintendo eShop As Part Of Trilogy Bundle 3 Games In One Or Released Three Games Separately. You Better Check This. Search Stalker In Nintendo eShop You Will Find All 3 Stalker Games In There. Believe Me. DavidNobleThompson (talk) 23:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheAstorPastor: - Regarding your email, I agree that the section is inappropriate, I don't think that revdel/oversight is necessary and I think that the best thing to do is revert and ignore. Waxworker (talk) 18:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you removed part of what I added to the Reception section, reason you gave was "removed unsourced content/content sourced to unreliable sources, onrpg & droid gamers are unreliable sources per WP:VG/RS". Ok for Droidgamers, but first paragraph you deleted was using Gamezebo as source (and not onrpg). Gamezebo is listed as a reliable source on WP:VG/RS if I'm not mistaken, so can that part stay? Thesheea (talk) 12:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thesheea: - Gamezebo is a reliable source, but the cited source for that section was Droid Gamers rather than the Gamezebo ref in the table. Re-adding it with an in-line cite to the correct source would be fine. Waxworker (talk) 18:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dave Fennoy voice acting roles (Lollipop Chainsaw)
Oh come on now, are you serious? Second time my edit was removed?? Sorry but I get the feeling that you are actually just looking for reasons to screw me over here. You know I don't even care about Dave Fennoy, I just noticed that he also voiced this character in this game that I recently played and saw that it was missing in his article. So I thought I am being nice and helpful and added it. Now you remove it again because of some stupid green marker is missing?! Look, a lot of his other listed voice roles in video games and other genres don't even have a source and they're still staying on this list. To me it feels like you're being more catholic than the pope and don't even know what you want at this point. You find that information everywhere on the web, it's not like I am spreading false information here. Play the game and YOU KNOW that it's him, cause he has a very recognizable voice. But you know what? Forget it, you win! Congrats, you managed to spoil Wikipedia for me. I've been a member for so many years now, and have made many edits and contributed in good faith every time, but never have I encountered such fierce resistance for such an insignificant edit that doesn't really matter at all. I am done wasting my time with this nonsense. Don't you think I have better things to do with my life than this? Knallmayr (talk) 15:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dave Fennoy voice acting roles (Lollipop Chainsaw)
Oh come on now, are you serious? Second time my edit was removed?? Sorry but I get the feeling that you are actually just looking for reasons to screw me over here. You know I don't even care about Dave Fennoy, I just noticed that he also voiced this character in this game that I recently played and saw that it was missing in his article. So I thought I am being nice and helpful and added it. Now you remove it again because of some stupid green marker is missing?! Look, a lot of his other listed voice roles in video games and other genres don't even have a source and they're still staying on this list. To me it feels like you're being more catholic than the pope and don't even know what you want at this point. You find that information everywhere on the web, it's not like I am spreading false information here. Play the game and YOU KNOW that it's him, cause he has a very recognizable voice. But you know what? Forget it, you win! Congrats, you managed to spoil Wikipedia for me. I've been a member for so many years now, and have made many edits and contributed in good faith every time, but never have I encountered such fierce resistance for such an insignificant edit that doesn't really matter at all. I am done wasting my time with this nonsense. Don't you think I have better things to do with my life than this? Knallmayr (talk) 15:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the removal of my addition of the Tom and Jerry (and Spike and Tyke) shorts, I've added everything with a level of consistency already found in the various Looney Tunes filmography pages, of which I've made contributions to for several years. Specific sources for the availability for each individual short is not necessary in that case, as the various DVD/Blu-ray episode listings are common knowledge. The one exception I'll grant is for the new release, "Tom and Jerry: The Complete CinemaScope Collection", which was just announced yesterday.
Those apply to both the Tom and Jerry, as well as the Spike and Tyke pages. All listings are correct and reliable, and the edits should be reverted back. Spindash54 (talk) 23:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Spindash54: - References are necessary for verification per WP:BURDEN, and I would not describe 'x DVD/Blu-ray release has x short' as "common knowledge" - in-line cites should be added to verify each entry. Waxworker (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Considering every home video page I linked to has the necessary citations, would it be acceptable to include everything but the CinemaScope release until that has an appropriate standalone page made? Spindash54 (talk) 01:09, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Spindash54: - See WP:USERGENERATED, which states that "In particular, a wikilink is not a reliable source" - linking to another article that has citations is not sufficient. The relevant citations should be added when adding the content to the article. Waxworker (talk) 01:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How exactly would you format this then without having a citation tag attached to every box of every row for every short? There’s no citation for the release dates on every single short. Spindash54 (talk) 01:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Live-action Disney Channel-based video games missing on the "List of Disney video games" article
Hi! Could you add video games based on live-action Disney Channel TV shows such as Lizzie McGuire, Hannah Montana and Cory in the House on the "Other games" section on the List of Disney video games article, please? I don't want to do it myself because I really have no idea on how many live-action Disney Channel-based video games there are in total. ArthurRead1976 (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@72.77.94.224: - That should be fine, but the source was at the top of the list rather than in-line on the relevant added entries, and it was unclear that it was the version history specifically being cited as the packs aren't noted on the main app store listing. An archive of the page should also be added as the version history is obviously prone to change and it only shows you so far back. Waxworker (talk) 20:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for suggesting archiving the page, that somehow slipped my mind.
In the meantime I would like to source the information related to pre-2024 song packs as well. As you noted, the version history on App Store has a time window of about a year; do you think it's reasonable to cite different archived versions of this page for each year? 72.77.94.224 (talk) 20:23, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@72.77.94.224: - Relying heavily on primary sources isn't great, and if no reliable secondary discuss the song packs then including a list of them at all may be challenged. I don't feel strongly about including the list one way or the other as long as it's sourced - assuming old archives of the page list the song packs, that should be fine as long as you include the url-status parameter as "unfit" as the live version of the page wouldn't have the relevant content, and makes the archive url the default link when looking at the citation. Waxworker (talk) 20:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All the secondary sources available are wikis (Fandom, Wikiwiki), which would be even worse. This kind of situation is common with indie games, so I surmise using the web archives of the App Store page is the only way to go. If you don't have objections then I'll make the edit. 72.77.94.224 (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Related Fandom account I found for you
Hello, Waxworker. I see there's a Fandom account related to you. The username's Waxworker2000, and the user picked the name of Waxworker because of his affinity to the video game Waxworks, like you did when you joined Wikipedia.
However, unlike you, Waxworker2000 had also an affinity to the Waxwork film series, which included Waxwork and Waxwork II.
Would you please stop removing Carl the Collector from Yowza! Animation? I added it back, as it's pretty evident that they animated it if you look at the credits of the show. By the way, it seems that the picture of Yowza's studio which is up on the article seems to have been uploaded by the actual company itself, which might violate guideline VGPCVGCP (talk) 18:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Degrassi
I tried editing George Buza's wikipedia page. In 2002, he played the character Atilla (a piercer and tattoo artist) in the episode 'Drive' (Episode 6, Season 2) of Degrassi: The Next Generation. I tried adding a reference, but my edit keeps getting removed. A quick google search will show you this. Not sure why it isn't already up there under his filmography, and why my edit keeps getting removed. 38.130.125.44 (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BOZ (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer. :) BOZ (talk) 18:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Edit reverts - Warning
Hi there, I have noticed you have a large history of reverting edits based on being "unsourced". Personally I believe these reverts are mostly unnecessary; for one, in pages like "[year] in film" (eg 1975 in film) which have lists of notable births, it's worth nothing that majority of them are unsourced, given the ease of going to the subject's article and finding their birthday with a reliable source. If you see a new birth added to a list, instead of reverting it for being unsourced, simply add a source yourself, especially when birthdays of notable figures should be relatively easy to find a source on, given they are likely on the subject's page anyway. In the perspective of a new editor, they may not realize the importance of sourcing, especially when seeing a list or page where there are little to none; it is important to leave them a message explaining so rather than reverting every one of their edits with little to no explanation other than a brief edit summary. From your edit history and previous talk page comments, I believe you fall into the territory of biting the newcomers; please do not do this. I see several comments on your talk page of users saying Wikipedia is "ruined" for them (or other similar wording) which is quite frankly not what Wikipedia strives to do. Please refrain from simply ignoring these users and reverting all their edits. Take time to leave them a message explaining why their edit was reverted and some helpful tips on finding reliable sources. This should be easy given numerous templates designed to do so.
@Jolielover: - The onus is on the editor adding content to provide sources for verification per WP:BURDEN, and per WP:USERGENERATED, a wikilink is not a source. I generally leave warnings for unsourced content, and I do not believe this is bitey. I think that Wikipedia's core policy of verifiability is very important; just because there is other unsourced content on an article, that is a bad example to be followed and not a reason to add more. Waxworker (talk) 09:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see you reverted to a previous edit version. I was the second employee hired (first was a programmer who was later let go) and I worked on all the Mesa Logic games and so I obviously have firsthand knowledge. If you looked on the credit screen in the actual game, you would see my name listed along with my photo.
I just came across the wikipedia entry yesterday and noticed some errors and omissions. So, I made a few changes regarding some inaccuracies, misspellings, etc. (my name being one!). I also added other names of the creators that were not previously listed (including myself). I also added a photo of the team in the early 90s (before Hector S. joined).
@Jwebbatx: - Please see WP:COI - directly editing articles in which you have personal involvement is discouraged, and your personal experience with the game is WP:OR and unreliable. Coverage in secondary reliable sources (e.g. gaming news, magazines) is required for verification per WP:BURDEN. A list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games determined by previous consensus may be found at WP:VG/RS. Per the guidance at Template:Infobox video game, we don't list every person that worked on a game, artists for example should "List no more than three people" - the infobox should list just the leads or those 'popularly' described by reliable sources as having X role in a game's development, and be sourced in the body of the article. Waxworker (talk) 20:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is a reliable source for acting credits? Almost none of the credits I see on any wikipedia page have a source. So none of the acting credits on Wikipedia should even exist according to your logic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxxurenthesecond (talk • contribs) 18:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Moxxurenthesecond: - WP:RSP has a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources that have previously been discussed, and the searchbar near the top may be used to search the RSN archives for previous discussions about sources that aren't on the list. Wikiproject Television doesn't seem to have a similar list of sources related to TV specifically, but Wikiproject Film does here. Unsourced content is an issue and existing unsourced content is a bad example to follow. Waxworker (talk) 22:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You removed my inclusion of Rota voicing Father Ventura in Indiana Jones and the Great Circle because I "didn't provide a reliable source." The game is the source. He's named in the credits, about 3 minutes and twenty seconds in from the start of the credits. The game is also listed in his IMDb page – which a link is provided for at the bottom of his Wikipedia page under the "External links" section – and he's listed on the game's own IMDb page. Am I supposed to find an interview of him talking about the game or something? Kalb157 (talk) 13:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no reliable sources (interviews, articles, etc.) discussing Rota's role. The most reliable source for him being in the game is the game itself as he's listed in the game's end credits. Kalb157 (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dbacon08: - Changes to content should have in-line citations for verifiability, and the linked pages are obviously prone to change, so an archive url with the relevant content should also be added. I did a brief spot check and neither of those linked pages seem to say what other channels Mysticons airs on, for example. Waxworker (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stunt Rock re-released as Sorcery
I re-entered my reception info on the Stunt Rock page along with a reference that links to the National Film and Sound Archive of Australia which has the movie poster for the Sorcery release.
Yes, I was one of those individuals who were lured in by the movie poster because I was a Sword and Sorcery film fan. Imagine my surprise when instead of a fantasy film promising "The ultimate rush" (Tagline sound familiar?), I got a mockumentary about stuntman Grant Page and Stunt Rock.
This wasn't the first time Film Ventures International re-released films under another title. They did it with Day of the Animals. When they re-released that film under the title Something is Out There, they were nice enough to put a disclaimer that said "Formerly Day of the Animals". Toplar Scarre (talk) 22:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@80.65.243.229: - The added content (Transom having a "massive crush on him", the claim about the change in age, MAX, and having less of a stutter) is all unsourced. See Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:BURDEN - the onus is on the editor adding content to cite sources verifying the content added. WP:RSP has a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources that have previously been discussed, and the searchbar near the top can be used to search the RSN archives if a source isn't listed there. Waxworker (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding GameZ
Hello!
I noticed that the changes I have made to a few Zipper Interactive titles were undone due to a lack of an official citation regarding their game engine. However, I do have some evidence to support my claim. If you are interested, may I e-mail you my findings?
@Adamdevofficial: - I prefer to communicate on-wiki and do not generally respond to emails - I think that anything that would be put in an email regarding this topic can be discussed on my talk page. See WP:OR - evidence of a claim needs to have been published in reliable sources, and the Github link given in some edit summaries does not appear reliable as it is WP:USERGENERATED (see previous RSN discussions for Github, examples being 1, 2, 3). The guidance at Template:Infobox video game also says to only list the engine in the infobox "for those engines listed in Category:Video game engines, either engines with an established, independent article (such as Unreal Engine), or those that have a redirect to their own section on an appropriate developer or series page". Waxworker (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Waxworker. It is admirable that you care enough about Wikipedia to make as many edits as you do, and I agree that unsourced content on the site is a significant issue. However, the Wikipedia help pages make a number of things clear:
1) Good-faith edits must only be reverted if the edit makes the article clearly worse, if it does not improve the article [Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary];
2) Wikipedia's guidelines require information to be citeable to sources, not for it to have been cited to sources. Edits that do not include citations are only supposed to be removed if "it is doubtful any sources are available for the information". [Wikipedia:Content removal] Information must be verifiable—this does not in itself mean that the verification has to be included;
3) While all information must be verifiable, only certain content MUST include an inline citation, namely: —direct quotations; —material that has been or is likely to be challenged; —contentious information about living or recently deceased people. [Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Citing sources];
6) As you know Wikipedia asks you not to "bite the newcomers", and the first point of advice on how to avoid becoming a biter is "Improve, don't remove". You have commented on this page that you do not think your practices are "bitey", but when you remove or revert good faith edits for being unsourced, without them meeting the criteria mentioned in point 3 above, it is very bitey. [Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers]
I would like to, very sincerely and with a full heart, ask you to stop reverting unsourced good-faith edits as a matter of course. Please consider unsourced edits carefully against the criteria recommended by Wikipedia mentioned above, and only revert edits when necessary. There is plenty of unsourced content being added on Wikipedia that is truly contentious or likely to be challenged, and our efforts should be direct towards this content, rather than that which is easily verifiable and not likely to be challenged. The most that any such content warrants is to tag the content as needing citation, and/or to contact the editor to ask them to add citations/reference, but I would suggest your valuable time is better used for more problematic content.
@Ben wren: - Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary is an essay, not a policy - I think that WP:BURDEN is clear in this regard that "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". I do not think that reverting addition of unsourced content is bitey, and warning templates link resources for citing sources that are helpful for new editors. WP:Verifiability is a core policy that I believe is very important, and I think that tagging claims as citation needed is best used for unsourced content that's been on an article for a long time, while reverting & warning is better for newly added unsourced content. Waxworker (talk) 13:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Waxworker. You're right, Wikipedia:BURDEN is pretty clear — The sentence you quote above is followed by a list of the limited situations in which inline citations must be given, which I listed above (to be clear, these are: direct quotations, material that has been or is likely to be challenged, and contentious information about living or recently deceased people). The same section of guidance then goes on to say "Whether or how quickly material should be removed for lacking an inline citation to a reliable source depends on the material and the overall state of the article", which makes clear the fact that not all material should be removed for lacking a citation. It goes on to say that if removing content for lacking a citation, you should state "your concern that it may not be possible to find a published reliable source, and the material therefore may not be verifiable". This further reinforces the point that only material that is unlikely to be verifiable, that is contentious or likely to be challenged, should be removed. Whereas, material that IS likely to be verifiable and which is uncontentious should be tagged for citation, not removed. I'm not sure you are taking the entirety of the Verifiability policy into account when you use it to back up your actions.
Further to this, the Editing policy at WP:PRESERVE states: "Rather than remove imperfect content outright, fix problems if you can, tag or excise them if you can't." It goes on to say that the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy discusses situations in which "it might be more appropriate to remove information from an article rather than preserve it", specifically those to do with "handling unsourced and contentious material". This further reinforces that it is only material which is contentious as well as unsourced that should be removed rather than preserved. I can't find anything in a policy page that supports your assertion that tagging claims as citation needed is better only for long-standing unsourced content, while reverting and warning is better for new unsourced content.
Now I think I've already made a clear case in terms of policy. But in addition to the fact that the policies themselves directly provide guidance that contradicts your approach, Wikipedia is a community, and while the essays I've cited above along with the policy pages may not be official policy, they do largely reflect best practice as deemed so by the community. You say you don't think your practices are bitey, but I can see from your talk page that there are many users who have come here to say they have felt bitten, and I am one of them. I understand your inclination to follow policy, but if you're disregarding the wealth of advice and wisdom on these essay pages, and in doing so are hurting other editors efforts to improve Wikipedia, I think you need demonstrate how the advice on those essay pages goes against Wikipedia policy, and pursue changing those pages, as they are where many Wikipedians learn the best practice for the site. Ben wren (talk) 15:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben wren: - I'm personally not interested in pursuing changing essays - different editors interpret policy differently and have different opinions on editing (deletionist or inclusionist in particular, also see Wikipedia:You do need to cite that the sky is blue and Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue) and my opinions on this matter differ from yours. Unsourced content is a problem "that may justify removal" per WP:PRESERVE, and I believe that WP:BURDEN takes presidence when unsourced content has been challenged - WP:CITOGENESIS is a concern if otherwise reliable sources copy the unsourced claim. When reverting content, warnings inform the editor who added the content that claims made on an article should be backed up with a source and that it is their responsibility to add one; the guidance linked in the warning template politely informs them on citing sources and encourages re-adding the content with a reliable source. I do not think this is bitey. Ultimately I think that unsourced content is a problem, reverting unsourced content is challenging it, the onus is on the editor adding content to source it, and warning for unsourced content is appropriate given the verifiability guidelines. Waxworker (talk) 17:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You say that Wikipedia:BURDEN takes precedence when unsourced content has been challenged. But my comment already demonstrated that Wikipedia:BURDEN does not back up your approach to deletion of unsourced content. To reiterate:
You quoted from the policy: "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". The policy elaborates on this by listing the situations in which inline citations must be given — direct quotations, material that has been or is likely to be challenged, and contentious information about living or recently deceased people. It goes on to say "Whether or how quickly material should be removed for lacking an inline citation to a reliable source depends on the material and the overall state of the article", which makes it clear that the default is NOT that all material lacking a citation should be removed. It also says that if removing content for lacking a citation, you should "state your concern that it may not be possible to find a published reliable source, and the material therefore may not be verifiable". This further reinforces the point that removal is only appropriate for material that is unlikely to be verifiable or that is contentious (assuming it doesn't meet any of the listed criteria for essential citation). If it is likely to be verifiable, removal is not appropriate.
@Ben wren: - I do not think that the sections you have quoted "[make] it clear that the default is NOT that all material lacking a citation should be removed", and I believe that WP:BURDEN makes it clear that challenging unsourced content is appropriate and that the onus is on the editor adding content to source it. I think that the edit summary of "unsourced" when reverting unsourced content adequately states my concern about the verifiability of the content. Help:Introduction to Wikipedia itself says that "You can add content (using references to support your claims)" and the header when editing any article says "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources". Verifiability is a core policy and editors are frequently reminded of this. I think that care should be taken when removing large amounts of material - I certainly don't think the WP:TNT approach is best for every poorly sourced/unsourced article, but newly added unsourced content can and should be removed and the editor adding it warned & informed of Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Waxworker (talk) 22:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While i was giving the correct year to the time Pillow Pets started advertising in 2009, you were undoing it multiple times. One time, i gave the source, but i keep triggering the abuse filter every time i try to fix it. 2004 is way too early for pillow pets commericals. There were new 6 different animal types during that time? I agree to the terms of use! 206.85.118.41 (talk) 20:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anglia Mohindra - private message
It was from the Companies House website where she was a director of a company that her mother has taken over, and Anjli is described as a Post Mistress, and not as an actor. I know this is the Anjli we are talking about, but I'm not sure whether I should connect the two, especially with the whole Horizon scandal at this time. I'll leave it to you to decide whether I have to create a citation in these circumstances, in which cawe it does not get published, or whether it can go without until the Horizon scandal is over and compensation has been paid. Busspotter69 (talk) 08:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Busspotter69: - See WP:BLPPRIMARY, which states that "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth" - Companies House is government records that should not be used as a source for a biography. Waxworker (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
About B.J. Ward that also voiced Winnie Woodpecker
But it was true, B.J. Ward did voiced winnie woodpecker in the new woody woodpecker show. Look at the walter lantz wiki website or in the behind the voice actors website, and then type the new woody woodpecker show to search for it, or you can also type B.J. Ward to search for that, and then scroll down to the year 1999, and then you will see that B.J. Ward has voiced winnie woodpecker.
But sorry that I dind't add a reliable source
JustinThomasArieVanOorschot (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JustinThomasArieVanOorschot: - Wikis are an unreliable WP:USERGENERATED source. Behind the Voice Actors is a reliable source per WP:RSPBTVA, but unlike other confirmed roles on the site which are marked as verified with a green checkmark, Winnie Woodpecker isn't marked as verified, so I don't believe it is suitable as a source verifying the role. Waxworker (talk) 18:24, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you doing this?
You're reverting things that don't have a source that satisfies you? How about not bothering with this, and removing only things that are contestable or not true? People contribute in small parts sometimes, and if it doesn't have the citation, YOU can add it too. Reverting things out of a sense of griefer duty is not a valuable contribution. NFG (talk) 09:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:BURDEN, which states that "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution". The onus is on the editor adding content to source claims. Removing unsourced content is not 'griefing'. Waxworker (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Waxworker - You're the person who choses to remove content that can be verified. You're the one whose own page says "fix, don't delete." But you're still out here deleting stuff, instead of fixing stuff. You can be helpful in other ways but you chose to delete first. You're doing it because you can, because it's a rule you can follow. That's griefing, in my eyes. I don't view it as constructive. NFG (talk) 03:10, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NFG: - Unsourced content is an issue and removed content can be restored with a reliable source. I think that dealing with unsourced content is important to the integrity of Wikipedia, and WP:VERIFIABILITY is a core policy. I recommend looking over WP:VG/RS for a (non-exhaustive) list of reliable/unreliable sources related to video games and Help:Referencing for beginners for guidance finding & citing reliable sources. Waxworker (talk) 15:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@waxworker - I understand the rules, and I value correct but unsourced information over volunteer griefers who'd rather delete pages and argue than spend five seconds adding the source themselves. You're choosing perfect over good, I don't value your efforts, and I'm not going to jump through your hoops. NFG (talk) 00:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
![[10]](https://cdromance.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Winning-Eleven-5-Japan-Coverart-PS2-SLPM-62053.jpg){kind=link}
![[11]](https://cdromance.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/283101-world-soccer-winning-eleven-6-international-playstation-2-front-cover.jpg){kind=link}
![[12]](https://cdromance.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/media_5646.jpg){kind=link}
![[13]](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/a2/2e/59/a22e59362bb91ae6b484c0049c44184e.jpg){kind=link}
![[14]](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/suEAAOSww-5iFaTJ/s-l400.jpg){kind=link}
![[16]](https://www.retroplace.com/pics/ps3/packshots/123966--world-soccer-winning-eleven-2010-aoki-samurai-no-chousen.png){kind=link}