Morbidthoughts (talk | contribs) →Sasha Banks: comment |
ZaniGiovanni (talk | contribs) →3rd opinion request: new section Tag: New topic |
||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
You said in the current revision where you reverted my edit that your reason was "Source doesn't make that distinction." They say black women, for which one of the women that is true, but not for both and that's misleading. The source doesn't directly specify "different ethnicities" but it's still talked about as the main topic in the article provided so it's not like it's false information or misleading either as it still acknowledges what is said. I hope you can understand everything I've said here and if what I wrote isn't the best way to write it either then perhaps we can try to come to a better agreement to word the sentence without it becoming misleading or false. I hope we can resolve this, many thanks. --[[User:Rockmusicfanatic20|Rockmusicfanatic20]] ([[User talk:Rockmusicfanatic20|talk]]) 12:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC) |
You said in the current revision where you reverted my edit that your reason was "Source doesn't make that distinction." They say black women, for which one of the women that is true, but not for both and that's misleading. The source doesn't directly specify "different ethnicities" but it's still talked about as the main topic in the article provided so it's not like it's false information or misleading either as it still acknowledges what is said. I hope you can understand everything I've said here and if what I wrote isn't the best way to write it either then perhaps we can try to come to a better agreement to word the sentence without it becoming misleading or false. I hope we can resolve this, many thanks. --[[User:Rockmusicfanatic20|Rockmusicfanatic20]] ([[User talk:Rockmusicfanatic20|talk]]) 12:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
:I understand your rationale, but we can not substitute that distinction in if the two cited sources don't since that's considered [[WP:OR|original research]]. You can discuss this issue on the article talk page to see if other editors can agree on a workable compromise. [[User:Morbidthoughts|Morbidthoughts]] ([[User talk:Morbidthoughts#top|talk]]) 20:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC) |
:I understand your rationale, but we can not substitute that distinction in if the two cited sources don't since that's considered [[WP:OR|original research]]. You can discuss this issue on the article talk page to see if other editors can agree on a workable compromise. [[User:Morbidthoughts|Morbidthoughts]] ([[User talk:Morbidthoughts#top|talk]]) 20:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
== 3rd opinion request == |
|||
Hello Morbidthoughts, hope you're doing well. Could you give your opinion as a third party in [[Talk:Imarat_cemetery#Reza]]? Discussion is about whether [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Imarat_cemetery&diff=1096411901&oldid=1096380183&diffmode=source this] should be kept in the article or not? Regards, [[User:ZaniGiovanni|ZaniGiovanni]] ([[User talk:ZaniGiovanni|talk]]) 22:44, 11 July 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:44, 11 July 2022
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Can you advise?
Hi,
I need an advise from experienced user. Materials sourced from this book "Encyclopedic dictionary of Azerbaijan toponyms. In two volumes. Volume I. Baku: "East-West"" being constantly deleted by the some users with comments that as per Reliable Sources Discussion it has been accepted as not WP:RS. However, while reviewing the Reliable Sources Discussion I find that no consensus reached and source was not marked as not WP:RS. But Im not sure, may be Im wrong. Can you, as experienced user, check and confirm that? thanks in advance--Abrvagl (talk) 04:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- There was no consensus that the source is reliable in that discussion. The burden of adding content is to show that the challenged material can be verified to a reliable source. If there is no consensus that the dictionary is reliable, the challenged material can be removed. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- But neither there was consensus that source is unreliable, doesn’t it mean that this source is equal to any other source that never went through the REliable sources discussion? Abrvagl (talk) 17:29, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- No, because there are sources from publishers with good reputations that they are never challenged and raised at RSN or BLPN. However, once a source is challenged as being unreliable, there has to be evaluation and consensus that determine that the source is reliable. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- But neither there was consensus that source is unreliable, doesn’t it mean that this source is equal to any other source that never went through the REliable sources discussion? Abrvagl (talk) 17:29, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Question.
Hi there, could you take a look at the recent edits here and give your opinion in the talk page? I think there may be some WP:BLP issues involved as well. Best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
BLP Expert
Hi, as BLP expert, can you have a look to potential BLP issue here? Thanks! --Abrvagl (talk) 10:20, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- If you have a BLP concern, please notify the BLP Noticeboard so you can have multiple BLP experts look at these issues besides me. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- OK, sorry for disturbance, I just thought that your input will be valuable, as previously you joined on Zani’s call User talk:Morbidthoughts#Question. Abrvagl (talk) 18:39, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Apology
I'd just like to apologise for deleting a large section on the "Evil Angel" film studio page. I'd misremembered the details of the deprecation of the "pornbio" notability standards and thought that websites like AVN and XBIZ were no longer considered reliable sources Have a good one! 101.53.217.249 (talk) 05:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Please Help me to comment and fix this Bio page Laksmi De-Neefe Suardana and comment on Talk:Laksmi De-Neefe Suardana
There has apparently been long-term massive deletion and content removals made by User:HiChrisBoyleHere on Laksmi De-Neefe Suardana page. Please stop his disruptive edits by deleting major references and replace it with Instagram links as a reliable reference, as he did on [1], [2], [3], [4] and more on article page history. He keep on rejecting himself to read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons guidelines before started adding Instagram links as the main source of references. That is why I have to escalate this Issue, please help me to fix the page. Thanks before...--Canny Yeohmanly (talk) 08:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Sasha Banks
Hi Morbidthoughts, I came here to you regarding an edit you made reverting the fair edit I made regarding the "first two black female wrestlers to headline WrestleMania."
In the edit I made explaining my rationale, I said.
"This sentence is partially misleading to me as Sasha Banks isn't "black" but rather mixed. Only her father is purely African-American, her mother however is of German descent and "white." Bianca Belair however is purely African-American, so the two aren't the same. I personally wouldn't include this sentence to begin with because it feels like it really tokens both of them but if it has to be included. This is the fair way it should be worded."[5]
My true feelings on that topic of bringing up race in the first place in such a way really tokenise both Sasha Banks and Bianca Belair. This is accurately felt by me in a way you literally say in your following revision removing the "Cambodian-American" part when you literally say "Why is race brought into this?"[6]
I get that we can't remove information when it's reliably sourced in the article so I felt I should rewrite the sentence which is fairer to other people who have different ethnicities. Sasha Banks is mixed, half of which is African-American rooted, the other half being "white" from her mother having pale skin and being of German lineage. You absolutely can't call Sasha "white", which is misleading as you can't ignore the other half of her ancestry. But you absolutely can't call her "black" either because that's also misleading because that invalidates the other half of her racial background. The articles which promote the narrative of the "first two black women to headline WrestleMania" take what they see at face value, and don't do any research into their racial backgrounds, while it's true for Bianca. It's however not true for Sasha. These articles are misleading and devalue one side of Sasha's heritage and I take issue with that. What is true, however, is the fact that the two have differing ethnicities for any woman before who has main-evented WrestleMania. Thus my "At WrestleMania 37, Banks and opponent Bianca Belair became the first women of differing ethnicities to jointly headline a WrestleMania" revision was born and that is the way it is appropriately and fairly worded of what is true to the topic that is discussed in the sources provided.
You said in the current revision where you reverted my edit that your reason was "Source doesn't make that distinction." They say black women, for which one of the women that is true, but not for both and that's misleading. The source doesn't directly specify "different ethnicities" but it's still talked about as the main topic in the article provided so it's not like it's false information or misleading either as it still acknowledges what is said. I hope you can understand everything I've said here and if what I wrote isn't the best way to write it either then perhaps we can try to come to a better agreement to word the sentence without it becoming misleading or false. I hope we can resolve this, many thanks. --Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk) 12:47, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- I understand your rationale, but we can not substitute that distinction in if the two cited sources don't since that's considered original research. You can discuss this issue on the article talk page to see if other editors can agree on a workable compromise. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
3rd opinion request
Hello Morbidthoughts, hope you're doing well. Could you give your opinion as a third party in Talk:Imarat_cemetery#Reza? Discussion is about whether this should be kept in the article or not? Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 22:44, 11 July 2022 (UTC)