Welcome to my talk page. Here are some tips to help you communicate with me:
- Please continue any conversation on the page where it was started.
- If I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here. I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
- Add or respond to an existing conversation under the existing heading.
- Indent your comment when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
- Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.
- To initiate a new conversation on this page, please .
- You should sign your comments. You can do this automatically by typing four tildes (~~~~).
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 |
Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived. |
List of films based on television programs
Pinging Geraldo Perez – this is more a reminder to myself than to you, Geraldo: but the WP:SCOPE of List of films based on television programs looks like it needs to be (massively?) narrowed. Right now it's including a bunch of what are basically TV movies in the list (including some TV movies that basically aired as episodes of these series – e.g. I just removed Shake It Up: Made In Japan which should not have been included under any circumstances!). That list should be narrowed to just theatrically-released films that are based on TV series. FWIW. (And, again, this is more a reminder to myself...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:15, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- See also: List of television spin-offs to do the same. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:27, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
- And: Lists of actors by television series is another cleanup job... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Diego Velazquez (American actor)
What do you think on the notability of this actor? Looks borderline on the WP:NACTOR guideline. I see unnecessary disambiguation, and there is a redirect to The Thundermans for the one without "American" in the disambiguator. The latest, with "American", was just moved from draft space. MPFitz1968 (talk) 06:30, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- @MPFitz1968: Honestly, I'm worried this might be a Cadeken sock. Diego Velazquez (actor) already exists as a redirect, so this looks like a clear attempt to Game the system to get around what has already been firmly decided is not a notable subject. Additionally, Draft:Diego Velazquez (American actor) doesn't come anywhere close to clearing WP:BASIC, etc. Please let me know if whoever this is tries to move this back into mainspace. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:51, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- From the draft's log - not sure you checked - User:D Vela 125 moved it into mainspace and then eventually moved it back. (I'm thinking Amaury's revert here sent them the message, though I have the feeling this won't be the last of their trying to add a BLP about the actor to mainspace.) D Vela has been pretty disruptive at The Thundermans over the past week and change by adding and readding a link to the actor. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Tyler Sanders (actor)
This is an actor who was in the Amazon series Just Add Magic: Mystery City, and recently died. From what I could gather on his acting career, he likely wouldn't have met WP:NACTOR, with his role in JAM:MC being his most significant. And I'm doubting his death would make him notable now, per WP:BLP1E. Tempted to go to WP:PROD or WP:AFD for this one. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- @MPFitz1968: Suggest converting to a redirect to Just Add Magic: Mystery City. Seems very unlikely subject can pass WP:NACTOR. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:45, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Done. Will leave my diffs at that page here and here. Needed to create an anchor at Just Add Magic (TV series) with the way the section headings (for Mystery City) are currently worded - both the Plot and Cast and characters sections are using similar subheadings and only one (anchor) is being recognized (the Plot one) for directing to the particular section. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Ana de Armas nationality
Hi there, I See that on Arma de Armas's wiki page, every time someones writes that she is both Spanish and Cuba, you keep deleting the "Spanish" part and you keep the "Cuban" part. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but Ana is both Spanish and Cuban. She is Cuban by birth and nationality and she is also Spanish by blood and by nationality because she got the Spanish nationality from her grandparents. So she has dual citizenship, so I'm not very sure why you keep deleting the "Spanish" part. It's a fact and everyone knows that. There are sources about that too and Ana herself confirmed that she has both nationalities and is proudly from both countries. Here are some sources that you can have a look at.
<https://trinikid.com/ana-de-armas-10-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-no-time-to-die-star> <https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/ana-de-armas-44631.php>
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darlindarlin7777 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Darlindarlin7777: Did you check Talk:Ana de Armas? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Winslow Fegley
Ping Geraldo Perez as well. I'm contemplating restoring the redirect, as he is not notable, despite an editor's claims (see the history of the page I'm linking), and in no way passes WP:BASIC or WP:NACTOR. But I want your guys' opinions. Amaury • 16:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not touching it, personally, but you have to do more than just "invoke" WP:NACTOR – you have to prove that it is met. It's not about the number of "starring roles" – it's about the number of "significant roles in significant projects". I don't think this has been proven here. Aside from that, yeah – WP:BASIC is definitely not demonstrated. Either converting to a redirect or moving into Draftspace seem reasonable in this case, though I'm not going to do it myself. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:14, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Editor who created the article at the redirect asserted that he passes those, restoring the redirect will be contentious, so next step is AfD. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:21, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Geraldo Perez and IJBall: It wouldn't have been the first time I've redirected a creator's biography article, but here's the AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winslow Fegley. Amaury • 17:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Side Hustle
That edit I made may not been necessary. What can be added is the mentioning of season 3 if and when they announce it.Cwater1 (talk) 01:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
You are claiming the series will end ([1]), when you have no source to verify that the series will end. That violates WP:V – it's not that it's unnecessary: it's that it's a completely unsourced claim. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:34, 23 June 2022 (UTC)- OK, scratch the above – I now see that you are referring to just the end of season #2 ([2]), not the end of the series. The thing is, even that requires a source – something indicating that the "season finale" will air on that date. The Futon Critic may be able to be used for that purpose. But it's certainly strongly preferable that that be sourced to something. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:45, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello IJBall,
- Backlog status
At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.
Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]
In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).
While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).
- Backlog drive
A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
- TIP – New school articles
Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
- Misc
There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}
, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
>NPP backlog: 10802 as of 17:45, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.
- Reminders
- Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
- If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing
{{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page. - If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
- To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
- Notes
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Days of Our Lives: Beyond Salem
Do you have any suggestions as to how to separate the cast lists for each season? I see that you removed the cast table that someone created. The second season basically has a 90% different cast list than the first season. Thanks for the help! Partyclams (talk) 05:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Partyclams: I would suggest posting about this to the article's talk page, to see if others have suggestions. My personal idea is that we do one 'Main' cast section (i.e. for both seasons), and then do 'Season 1/2' subsections below that to cover 'Supporting' and 'Guest' cast for the two seasons... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:30, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- That's a great idea! Thanks! Partyclams (talk) 05:45, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
IP 50.79.183.249
Ping Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968 as well. Will need more eyes here quickly, as the next edit should land them being reported. It's fairly clear they've also used another IP, beginning with 66. It's a school IP, so disruption coming from it doesn't surprise me. Amaury • 17:02, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is the specific disruption, besides removing
years_active
from IBs (which I haven't looked closely at)? - Meanwhile, I may need help at Maya Hawke, if anyone cares... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pretty much just that. They seem to have stopped and claim they are sorry for their behavior. I'll have a look at that page. Amaury • 21:12, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, a month-long editor (less, I think) is now edit-warring at Maya Hawke, whilst simultaneously ignoring a Talk page discussion and being wrong on the merits. I've given them a 3RR warning now on their Talk page. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:14, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pretty much just that. They seem to have stopped and claim they are sorry for their behavior. I'll have a look at that page. Amaury • 21:12, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
The Thundermans
May need some attention here. Editor refusing to follow WP:BRD. Amaury • 20:03, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Amaury: The edit looks legitimate – I would add that, but add it yourself, do the two new refs properly, and in the lede and not the infobox. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:47, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Lonesome Dove
Ordinarily, I would just accept the revert and move on. However, I wanted to comment on the edit summary Please stop robotically doing this
. FYI, I am not "robotically" changing assessments. Yes, I am using Rater as part of my assessment process, but when using that tool, I don't blindly accept its result. In this particular case, when I ended up looking at the article, I did not look at the talk page history, so I did not see that we'd been down this road on this article 2 weeks ago. I happen to disagree on the assessment; but you also happen to be an editor I respect (and you've helped me before on some things in the TV project). Had I recalled the change from 2 weeks ago and/or looked at the history, I would not have re-assessed the article. I just wanted to clear that up, especially the "robotic" part. ButlerBlog (talk) 14:57, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Butlerblog: Thanks for the explanation. I dunno what Rater is using to make assessments. On my end, I found the assessment criteria for especially 'C'-class to be vague-to-nonexistent, so I came up with my personal assessment criteria for that: User:IJBall/Assessment. In the case of Lonesome Dove: The Outlaw Years, I feel the article is neither long enough, nor contains enough individual sources (only about 10 sources), to graduate from 'Start' class. And this is an article that I created – so I can't be accused of inflating the criteria for an article-class promotion! FWIW. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:04, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Persistent disruption by User:CreecregofLife. Thank you. Amaury • 06:55, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth... (Ping Magitroopa as well.) Amaury • 06:56, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- I have commented. Hopefully this time, something is actually done. A 24-hour block is not going to solve this problem. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, enough is enough. Wikipedia requires collaborative work. I don't care how many good edits someone has. If they can't edit collaboratively and are constantly getting into edit wars and butting heads with other users, then they have no place here. Like I mentioned over there, if it were just one user with concerns, I could maybe be a little more sympathetic and try to come up with a solution or compromise both parties would be happy with. The problem here is that several different editors, including us, have brought up concerns regarding this editor. So it's not just a simple case of "this user has a vendetta against me" when it's several people with virtually identical concerns. Again, if it were just one person, I would be more open, but it's not. They keep complaining about their past being used against them, but they keep repeating their disruptive behavior. I have a past, too, which I believe I've shared with you before, but I have clearly learned from it. Even if I get into a conflict, which can happen, as we're only human, if someone brought up my past here, others may see it as unnecessary and may comment something to the effect of, "While yes, he was wrong here, I don't see any patterns indicating he has returned to his old habits." Nothing is guaranteed, of course, but still. Amaury • 07:32, 5 July 2022 (UTC)