Jump to content

User talk:Supermann

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by B-bot (talk | contribs) at 02:14, 28 November 2021 (Notification that File:Kingdom of Dust poster.jpg is orphaned and will be deleted in seven days per WP:CSD#F5). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Welcome!

Hello, Supermann, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stephen Hogan (July 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Calliopejen1 was:
If you would like your submission to be considered for the millionth time, please identify the WP:THREE highest-quality, most in-depth sources about the subject and paste them on the talk page. Once you have done so, you may resubmit for consideration of those sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:32, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's my research skills or the paywall being too high, the most reliable sources that I can access do not seem to write about his background in a simplistic way. It's always about his performance instead of his education, growth, why he chose to be in this business, etc. So please indulge me to take a stab at what you requested. Hopefully, they help make the case that he is notable enought. Obviously, I am not aruging he is Tom Cruise.
1) Source #9 on audiobook: "AudioFile, Discover the World of Audiobooks". AudioFile Magazine. Retrieved 2021-07-24. The magazine granted him the coveted Earphone Awards twice, lavishing their praise in the following words that I presume I shouldn't repeat in the body of the page
a) "...Narrator Stephen Hogan's performance of the twists and turns of Cyril's struggle is dramatic, life affirming, and inspiring. Hogan's pleasing Irish lilt shifts appropriately as he portrays the accents and diction of the upper- and lower-class characters. Hogan shines as he uses his gifted voice to recount Cyril's maturation into an intelligent and caring man. It's a coming-of-age tale delivered by Hogan in a sensitive narration. Listeners looking for both hearty laughs and gentle tears will enjoy Cyril's journey. R.O. Winner of AudioFile Earphones Award © AudioFile 2017."
b) "....Stephen Hogan's performance of this complex plot, filled with characters of many nationalities, is outstanding. His accents, mainly Chinese, are authentic, and he displays with conviction the wide range of emotions that permeate the story. About a third of the way through the book, listeners may find it helpful to go back to the prologue in order to follow the plot more coherently, but the need to do that does not lessen the excitement of this superbly narrated thriller. S.S.R. Winner of AudioFile Earphones Award © AudioFile 2009."
2) Source #47 on A Doll's House: Scott, Robert Dawson (March 22, 2004). "A Doll's House". The Times. p. 15. Here Stephen played the LEAD role, a fact that I didn't appreciate until Bonadea pointed out. It is reported that, "Newly appointed bank manager Torvald is brought to life in a beautifully judged performance by Stephen Hogan. Far from the pompous prig he sometimes seems, this is a handsome, almost dashing, Torvald, if anything quite affectionate to his "little squirrel" of a wife, Nora."
3) Source #15 on his LEAD role performance in Starship Trooper 3: Leydon, Joe (Aug 18, 2008). "Film Reviews: "Starship Troopers 3: Marauder". Variety. 412 (1). p. 23. Film critic Joe Leydon wrote for Variety, "Omar Anoke, the heroic sky marshal in charge of battling the big bugs, is a charismatic celebrity and chart-topping singer whose onstage movements and militaristic song list suggest Adolf Hitler as an "American Idol" contestant.
Many thanks. Supermann (talk) 19:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Calliopejen1: is the new rejection for real? I don't see any comments from you. Most of the @Bonadea:'s requests have been addressed, incl. the missing page numbers of non-free newspaper sources, other than the so-called deprecated sources that they could just go ahead and delete, if they don't want to see them anymore. Everything else is verifiable. Where is any sign of camaraderie? Why does this world have to be so cruel and unfair? Cite all the things you want to cite to reject me. It doesn't make sense! The WP:THREE you requested is right up here. Thanks. Supermann (talk) 16:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not a joke, but it is also not a rejection (a rejection means that the draft will not be considered further, a decline means that it can be considered further if the issues are addressed.)
  • Missing page numbers was a very small, albeit important, part of what was lacking. As for "so-called deprecated sources", that remark rather highlights the problem: you have not read the comments, or not understood them. You actually added a deprecated source after being alerted to the fact that they should be removed, and used a weird edit summary mentioning "self-published". I removed that one to help you out a bit, and also removed one of the three press release copies – your comment here shows that you hadn't actually read the sources you added, since it is impossible to miss the fact that this, this, and this is the same press release. You also seem to have missed (or ignored) the fact that deprecated sources (nothing "so-called" about them) were just one aspect of the source issues. Arguing that the reviewer ought to go through the draft to remove all sales sites, non-reliable sources, and deprecated or otherwise inappropriate sources is a non-starter – it is a major undertaking and not something to dismiss with a "the reviewer ought to do that". Please re-read CiphriusKane's detailed and insightful comments above. There are several specific sources they discussed there, which are still in the draft.
  • You also have clearly not read, or not understood, the repeated requests to add information about the productions in the theatre section (and also the radio/audio section – that has not been specifically mentioned, but the same issue applies there for a couple of the entries.) Surely, our readers are not expected to believe that Hogan appeared in the original productions of The Playboy of the Western World, Hamlet, Ett Dukkehjem, and Medea? Adding citations to reviews is not the same thing as adding information about the productions to the article. To spell it out, again: apart from the fact that it is not helpful to the reader to list a role with zero info about the production, a major role in a notable play is only relevant to an actor's notability per WP:NACTOR if the production is a major one. A school production is not notable unless written about extensively, a production on a national stage is clearly notable, and most productions fall somewhere in between. (As an aside, your claim above that Torvald is the lead role in A Doll's House is not correct, as also seen in the reviews you have referred to. There is one lead role in the play, and that is Nora; her husband doesn't appear on stage very often, but given the theme of the play those appearances are important, so that role is definitely one of the main ones, just not the lead.)
  • Finally, about WP:THREE – it looks like you interpreted "the talk page" as your user talk page, which is fair enough, but you need to add this to the draft's talk page. An AfC reviewer won't search your user talk page for that info. --bonadea contributions talk 09:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! @Bonadea:. Please see my responses below.
1) I believe @CiphriusKane: had taken the time and effort to really help remove the deprecated sources and improve the writing. I am immensely grateful. That's the kind of camaraderie I was looking for. I know I am too close to the writing and citation and it's really hard for me to kill my babies. So somebody else has to do it to help me appreciate your dislikings against those sources, despite I don't think they are controversial for this kind of topic. I have not added anything deprecated since his edits and will take to my heart to not use any such sources by comparing against the naughty list.
2) I am not familiar with the theater productions since I haven't got the chance to see any. I don't live in England or Ireland. I had to rely on local lousy reporting that haven't been in-depth about them. In my new WP:Three, I have taken the Torvald out for now, but given the sources have mentioned where the play were conducted, i.e. big theater names, I would presume the productions are big enough instead of school plays. I look forward to seeing movie adaptations of these famous plays.
3) I have added to the draft's talk page for the revised WP: THREE. Two of which concentrate on his movie lead roles written by critics that have their own Wikipedia page. His movie roles are what motivated me to write about him in the first place.
I appreciate highly for your time. Supermann (talk) 21:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what @Eternal Shadow: did down below by rejecting one more time without seeing WP:THREE on draft's talk page. But to answer back to @Bonadea:'s question on Torvald. In a possible citation spam victim[1], Mark Fisher indicated that "A Doll's House" was played at Perth Theatre. That's clearer than how Robert Dawson Scott put it. Let's sink that in for a moment and appreciate the production, even though I haven't been there. Thanks. Supermann (talk) 22:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The (latest) issue is the repeated lack of context for the roles. The draft has been submitted five times in the past week with little attempt to contextualise the performances or understand the issues beyond "add more sources". The reason why the performances need to be contextualised is because it determines the level of notability. Playing Oliver in a school play is a lot less notable than playing Oliver at Hammersmith Apollo Again, I'd urge ye to look at David Tennant#Acting career and see how it gives context to the performances. Unless if there's significant work done on the article, any further review submissions are just a waste of time, hence the rejection. Also, if the "well-known and significant award or honor" is the Earphone Awards, it's actually non-notable as, if this month's awards are any indication, 500-600 of these awards are given out per year and is basically "Editor's top picks". If he'd won an Audie, then it'd be different CiphriusKane (talk) 23:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments. I totally understand the need for contextualizing, but I don't see how paraphrasing the sources one more time helps much and how David Tennant's context help me recognize him at all until I saw the list of awards he has had. As an American, I fail to recognize most of the awards he got nominated or won. To me, they are less well known than Oscars, Emmys, Golden Globes. But enough about diminishing him and being American-centric. The American awards have their own issues with number of viewers going down each following year. Speaking of American centric, the Audie awards are sponsored by Audio Publishers Association and sometimes promoted as "the Oscars of the audiobook industry" by Audio File Magazine who is a sponsor to APA per https://www.audiopub.org/industry/sponsors and gives out its own Earphone Awards for "truly exceptional titles that excel in narrative voice and style, characterizations, suitability to audio, and enhancement of the text" that Stephen won. That should put it somewhere near the big league. I didn't see how WP:NACTOR mentioning any examples of awards. Until you told me, I have never heard of the Audie Award. And then I saw Stephen_Hagan_(actor)#Television_and_film_career. WOW! This guy has a page and Hogan doesn't? How is that fair? In Kingdom of Dust: Beheading of Adam Smith, Justin Richards wrote that, "...most of the drama revolving around the lead character...sinks or swims depending on Hogan’s performance." Imagine yourself playing a role which got beheaded by Islamic terrorists and how about letting that sink in for a moment before you trash him? None of the plays I listed were school plays. They are mostly done in big theaters such as "Abbey Theatre and Gate Theatre in Dublin and the Royal National Theatre in London, even though I haven't watched any. I can type out the theater names if that are helpful. Supermann (talk) 00:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have contextualized his theatrical lead role performances now - the direction that @CiphriusKane: and @Bonadea: want to see. I beg you to take one more look. Appreciate it. Supermann (talk) 04:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So @CiphriusKane: and @Bonadea:...still no further comments, despite the new edits to add nuance to his stage performance? Thanks. Supermann (talk) 03:22, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Fisher, Mark (March 28, 2004). "Back to the old house". The Sunday Times. p. 13.

August 2021

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. While you haven't been posting on user talk pages, you have blatantly been asking for inclusionists only to help you, which is probably even worse. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:05, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have only met deletionists so far. Asking help for inclusionists is simply to balance it out. It’s David vs Goliath now. Supermann (talk) 21:12, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See, that sort of battleground mentality is exactly what destroyed the so-called "inclusionist" movement here. They were unable to accept that most people do not consider themselves on one side or the other but rather take each article on its own merits, which is how it is supposed to work. Probably easier to accept that the community as a whole (not just the deletionist boogeyman) strongly supports having notability guidelines, and that not every subject is notable. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:43, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But then you forgot about "Wikipedia has no firm rules" in the Wikipedia:Five_pillars. Supermann (talk) 22:34, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't forget it, I live it every day, but I don't see how it applies in this situation. Please just don't canvass for only people who think exactly like you do in the future, that's really the important point here. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am just following up with existing people who have commented. Not sure why I was on your radar in the first place. I didn't canvass anyone specifically new. I was just following advice and finding avenues where people could give a fresh set of eyes to the writing so that they don't get plagued by the negativity from the rejectors who are deciding what millions of readers should read. This kind of totalitarianism is against the Five Pillars. Supermann (talk) 01:41, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your blatant canvassing for help from inclusionists at the help desk. Your hyperbolic accusations of totalitarianism are comical but not compelling. All I've done is speak to you about Wikipedia policy. Have a nice day. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:46, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If help desk is not the place, then something is clearly wrong with the support system as indicated. Have a good rest of the weekend. Supermann (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You guys are letting guidelines and essays trump the policy. That just doesn't feel right, btw. Supermann (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Comments like this are simply unacceptable. This is a collaborative project. If you can't remain calm and engage in polite debate with others, you can expect to be swiftly blocked the next time this kind of thing happens. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Nikita (TV series). While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Sleptlapps (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the weirdest accusation of all time when it's about free access to encyclopedic information. Please Wikipedia:Assume good faith before you go down this dark path. Wikipedia:Five pillars. Thanks but no thanks. Supermann (talk) 00:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I read that diff and it is promotional(intentional or not) and not appropriate for the article. Please avoid this sort of content in the future. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 00:51, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's unintentional because I didn't realize it's a press release, but that doesn't deny it's still free without any subscription monthly payment. Nobody is being asked to pay for anything. It's like Robinhood in this capitalistic world. Denying readers this key intel is more like asking them to either download piracy or buy bluray release. Thanks but no thanks. I don't have money to spare, no matter how much I like the show. Supermann (talk) 01:15, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HighInBC this is not the first and last time he will do this. He has already been the subject of various admin noticeboard incidents regarding his behavious first here, second here, and third here and he was given a final warning here. This behaviour of accusing me of bad faith clearly violated the final warning and is comparing me to a persecutor. I don't believe anyone should be behaving like this to other users as this could really hurt someones feelings. Isn't there anything that can be done about this? Sleptlapps (talk) 02:02, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've referred this behaviour to the current ANI thread on their behaviour here. I'm in agreement that their actions and refusal to retract their uncivil statements is beyond the pale CiphriusKane (talk) 02:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan discretionary sanctions notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning regarding advertising

If you attempt to advertise anything again, especially CW Seed, you will be blocked to prevent further spamming. I already know you don't think it is advertising but this is and you have already been told this. It is not relevant to the article about the show. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 02:35, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is this “advertise” when the disadvantage of CW Seed have been discussed? Relevance seems to be in the eyes of the beholders. Your reasoning beats me. Do what you have to do with your coercion. I finished catching up the show by CW Seed without any piracy and paying a single dime for any product advertised during the commercial breaks. I am proud of myself. Readers can tell the censorship you imposed. We agree to disagree. Supermann (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gravedancing

This is completely unacceptable. You are expected to be civil in all your interactions with other users, even if they are blocked, and celebrating their block is an extreme violation of this. You were warned about such incivility just under 2 weeks ago. Please read over WP:CIVIL, as civility is not optional CiphriusKane (talk) 20:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you read what you cited, "Describing factually, solely for the information of other editors, disruptive activities that resulted in a ban/block" is NOT GRAVEDANCING. That editor tagged me as a promo hack when I am NOT. I was just giving you context. If you refuse to see, I respectfully disagree. Supermann (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Insulting editors who are now blocked/banned/retired. This is motivated by the idea that the editor in question is unlikely to see the insult, and if they do see it won't respond to it. This is wrong even if the editor in question never sees the insult because it contributes to a negative environment that is less likely to encourage editors to work together." Posting "Justice!" to the block is an insult CiphriusKane (talk) 02:54, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. This is about fairness. I fully expect they will come back after accepting some offer and reflect on their behavior as I reflect on mine. Thanks. Supermann (talk) 02:59, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI report

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. CiphriusKane (talk) 02:50, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Simon Kassianides, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dollyplay (talk) 07:43, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dollyplay: Hello, I would appreciate you teaching me what kind of policies and guidelines out there that you cited to reverse my good-faith edit at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_Kassianides&diff=1047325505&oldid=1046325504&diffmode=source? Wouldn't my edit add context to the role, when the fictional role doesn't have its own page? Simon is a great actor. I have seen him on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, Nikita, etc. But this isn't about him. It's more about the role. The role was first mentioned in Casino Royale (2006 film), but it finally has a face to it until Quantum of Solace. However, the Quantum page doesn't even list him to clarify this role in this entire Bond/Vesper Lynd story arc. This doesn't seem right. Thanks. Supermann (talk) 13:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit was inappropriate and disruptive. Dollyplay (talk) 23:58, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know people like to dig up archived discussions in years beyond, so to set the record straight here, User:Dollyplay, User:Triosdeity and User:Sleptlapps are all sock puppets of User:Nyxaros2. The extent this person is willing to hurt Wikipedia is astounding. And I am not Wikipedia:Gravedancing. Supermann (talk) 17:35, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Vesper Lynd. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dollyplay (talk) 14:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are so condescending. On Vesper Lynd, I don't see the other "played by" being deleted by you, incl. baccarat expert Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers). There are other trivial stuff on there that I appreciate and don't mind. But shouldn't you be fair? Thanks. Supermann (talk) 15:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project core team is happy to inform you that the Months of African Cinema Contest is happening again this year in October and November. We invite Wikipedians all over the world to join in improving content related to African cinema on Wikipedia!

Please list your username under the participants’ section of the contest page to indicate your interest in participating in this contest. The term "African" in the context of this contest, includes people of African descent from all over the world, which includes the diaspora and the Caribbean.

The following prizes would be recognized at the end of the contest:

  • Overall winner
    • 1st - $500
    • 2nd - $200
    • 3rd - $100
  • Diversity winner - $100
  • Gender-gap fillers - $100
  • Language Winners - up to $100*

Also look out for local prizes from affiliates in your countries or communities! For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. We look forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:20, 30th September 2021 (UTC)

Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

October 2021

Great job on editing Vesper Lynd. The article looks great. Keep up the good work 🙌👏👌👍🤜🤛🎉🥇🏆🥂💯🎯🙏 ~~~~ Dollyplay (talk) 17:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for reaching consensus. I apologize if my tone sounded "accusatory," but you really could have just pointed out to me that this latest edit could have worked the very first time. Have a good rest of the weekend. Supermann (talk) 17:31, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Stephen Hogan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stephen Hogan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Hogan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

DGG ( talk ) 02:31, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle at Lake Changjin

Please read wp:brd and stop your edit warring. The policy clearly says if edits have been reverted then the next step is to discuss them on the talk page without restoring those changes back. Estnot (talk) 00:48, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. CiphriusKane (talk) 04:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Stephen Hogan. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Softlavender (talk) 04:54, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kingdom of Dust: Beheading of Adam Smith for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kingdom of Dust: Beheading of Adam Smith is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kingdom of Dust: Beheading of Adam Smith until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

CiphriusKane (talk) 05:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find a substantial reliably sourced review other than a local newspaper for Empire of Dust, the articles will be kept. I tried for an hour or so this morning, and couldn't find one. There is only one effective way to stop deletion: find additional sources; AfD will almost always keep in situations like this if good sources can be found. . Argument doesn't work nearly as well. DGG ( talk ) 01:34, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd essentially concur with DGG here. At the moment your're disruptive, heading for a block, and the way you are contributing to discussions are hindering rather than helping.. I read a few people around who would likely!vote keep Hogan given identification of three or possibly two quality RS sources. Obviously is Kingdom of Dust became a cult classic it would be helpful to Hogan, it practice from non-RS reviews it possibly seems a possibly plausible concept seemingly poorly executed which bombed and I don't see it being notable on WikiPedia. But ANI to a block will likely happen if you don't change behavior. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:40, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I deeply appreciate your offer here and on the DRV relist. I know it probably can't overcome the three endorses there, but I am grateful for your lone voice. If TheBirdsShedTears could really refrain from their endless innuendo and accusation of COI, I will behave myself and would have shut up already. I have never petitioned to delete anyone else's article and that's just not how I have rolled. DGG has helped me grow over the last four years. And if everybody is like you with such a collaborative mindset, I would have had no beef with anyone. Again, I am sorry if I offended anyone. Have a good day. Thank you so much. Supermann (talk) 17:34, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TheBirdsShedTears's call the Dublin!Live paid association and linkage to the AfD is possible, plausible or even probable. One needs to think like a streetwise Templebar Dub barman. If I'm not mistake Leeson Street, as well as at least previously having a reputation as a Red-light district, is also if I am not mistaken the home of Hogan's agency, and it it possible they (or someone) were monitoring his Wiki page and triggered them set up an interview with Dublin!Live/Hogan. It wouldn't be the first time I've seen a press release or similar issued relating to an entity at AfD. Speaking from experience if one spends a lot of time researching a subject there is a risk of developing a COI and there is a risk of doing something off-wiki which might mean a COI has developed .... (eg contacting the press), and if that is the case a COI would have developed and would need to be declared. But please stay calm, don't accuse anyone of anything. The easiest way to drove cattle or get them to go into a supermarket is simply to walk them in gently and not to excite them. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:16, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To add another example of how friendly I always am, I added a COI on the Janet Yang page as seen here, as I was learning how to do BLP on others and I wanted to be fair and uphold the standards. But I have never hunted down the page creator Sophyu667 like TheBirdsShedTears has been treating me for one single time. I also did not propose deletion to the Janet Yang page, as I found the knowledge about this person helpful, even if outdated. Is she as notable as Stephen Hogan? Hard to tell if I apply all the stringent requirement that a lot of the enforcers have been saying. Hopefully she is. And I really don't mind her page's existence. That's who I am. More knowledge is better than no knowledge. Please don't delete Sophyu667's work even though it seems it's their only work. Thanks. Supermann (talk) 19:46, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Saturday. I can't find a review, but here is the British Board of Film Classification page Hostage | BBFC. If producing, directing, distributing movies are easy, all of us will be in Hollywood right now, making millions. The movie is now widely available for streaming. https://www.amazon.com/Behind-Enemy-Lines-Elyes-Gabel/dp/B099P52Z6H Previously, it doesn't seem to be available in the United States. Thanks and have a great weekend. Supermann (talk) 14:46, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!

Greetings,

It is already past the middle of the contest and we are really excited about the Months of African Contest 2021 achievements so far! We want to extend our sincere gratitude for the time and energy you have invested. If you have not yet participated in the contest, it is not too late to do it. Please list your username as a participant on the contest’s main page.

Please remember to list the articles you have improved or created on the article achievements' section of the contest page so they can be tracked. In order to win prizes, be sure to also list your article in the users by articles. Please note that your articles must be present in both the article achievement section on the main contest page, as well as on the Users By Articles page for you to qualify for a prize.

We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

  • Overall winner
    • 1st - $500
    • 2nd - $200
    • 3rd - $100
  • Diversity winner - $100
  • Gender-gap filler - $100
  • Language Winners - up to $100*

Thank you once again for your valued participation! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list


Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Supermann. Thank you. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding Take the High Road to Stephen Hogan's filmography. If you refer to List of Take the High Road characters, he was listed on there as even having a "debut appearance" without any citation way before I got interested. TCM Movies if not Turner Classic Movies even claimed he was a child actor on the soap opera per Stephen Hogan - Turner Classic Movies (tcm.com), "He made his acting debut as a child in the Scottish soap opera 'Take The High Road,' but didn't return to the screen for fifteen years." Obviously, someone else may say TCM is not a reliable source and all that, but user generated, etc. I defer to your best judgment and experience. Many thanks again. Supermann (talk) 17:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

60 Minutes With

I am really confused how you ended up with this diff. What you wrote is very much not what the article said. The comparison to Buried occurred in this quote directly preceding the one in that article: "The low budget constraints are visible here within the one set, but much like (the bigger budget) 'Buried' which was predominantly filmed in a far smaller set, the limitations do not hinder the progression of the narrative." Could you explain this for me, please? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 16:07, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MJL. English is not my native language, so maybe I was lost in translation when two native speakers said I caused confusion. But in my view, the two paragraphs are next to each other, i didn't mean to imply anything on acting alone, even though Buried did have some acting awards nominated/winning for Ryan Reynolds. My larger goal is to pit Buried against Kingdom of Dust. And because Djm-leighpark mentioned this interview, I got to watch Buried last night for free on my otherwise annually subscribed Amazon Prime Video. Please help improve it if you can. Buried is a decent film. If the reviewer pit it against Kingdom, I think we could mention it, though I may not have a Manual of Style essay/guideline that I could pull up to back up my view. Many thanks also for your earlier support. Supermann (talk) 16:49, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am now significantly more confused than before. Just because some guy on his podcast compared the two films doesn't mean we need to do the same.
While I understand that the language barrier is understandable, I still see some problems with a few of your other edits to the article on Kingdom of Dust. For example, you wrote here that you fixed spelling errors despite not actually doing that, and your edit summary here claimed you were going to remove text when instead you were adding some.
You might find you have a less difficult time contributing to Chinese Wikipedia which is written in your native language. They recently lost several editors from the mainland for various reasons, and I am sure they would welcome your contributions adding American films there. I mean look how many English-language movies are missing from there!
I'll be sure to check out Buried though on an unrelated note. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 17:58, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok on not comparing Buried to Kingdom here. It's 2 against 1. I defer to your judgment and long experience. The first example you gave here, if not fixed, would create an error in the reference section, if not mistaken. The spelling errors didn't necessarily mean errors on word spelling. The second example here is removal of puffery as said in the summary, if any, to remove the accusation of COI and a flattering portrait of Stephen Hogan's acting performance.
No. I won't contribute to Chinese Wikipedia for now, only because 500 Million + Chinese netizens can't contribute to it.
Maybe you might change your mind after actually watching Buried. I wouldn't keep my hopes up. I promise. Supermann (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021 ANI notification

Information icon There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Bludgeoning at Hogan AfD and DRV. The discussion is about the topic Stephen Hogan. Thank you. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:29, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. CiphriusKane (talk) 18:24, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite block

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Specifically, WP:BATTLEGROUND conduct (at times testing the boundaries of WP:NPA, if not exceeding it outright) and WP:BLUDGEON to excess. Supermann, there appears to be a failure on your part to see these problems addressed, despite multiple attempts by others urging you do so. I think at this point, you need to provide substantive and convincing assurances that this misconduct will be corrected, if you are to be unblocked (a reminder that reviewing WP:GAB closely will aid in such an effort).
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

El_C 11:22, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Supermann (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Happy Friday. What I have received is definitely a form of Wikipedia:Harassment. I have received sock puppetry attacks and the F word. My edits are an open book where you can see what happened in its totality. I have hardly taken anyone to ANI in the past and that's why at my core, I don't like battleground. I apologize for having used heated words towards a particular editor, when I, as a inclusionist, saw my contributions getting underappreciated by them as deletionists. It's one of those Prometheus moments where I felt I am so alone in this community when all I want is to share knowledge instead of getting knowledge deleted. But then I realize I am really not alone. That's why during the deletion discussion process, there are other inclusionists who are helping. They are the reasons that I want to come back. I don't want to relitigate the issues now that the original deletion nominator of one of the recent pages I created is endorsing a weak keep, while my other creation has been recognized by the Library of Congress as one of the films not yet named to the National Film Registry, even if it gets deleted here. I vow to disavow the battleground mentality and seek others' permission before I truly want to add something on Wikipedia. I don't plan to create a new account to evade and accept this punishment to cool my head. But at a minimum I want to be able to thank those who have helped improved the articles. I can stay away from them for a specific time. Many thanks for your time and consideration. Have a great weekend. Supermann (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I stopped reading at "I have received harassment". See WP:NOTTHEM. Sandstein

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Dude, nobody goes on about "inclusionists" or "deletionists" unless they've got a battleground attitude. The rest of us are just trying to make the encyclopedia better and don't want to get dragged into drama. You can probably bet that people who go on about this kind of thing (picking sides and going on about it at length) are going to start getting blocked a lot more often. I've been on Wikipedia for 14 years now. The first few years were pretty intermittent, and I gave up on Wikipedia multiple times. Even so, that's almost ten years of solid editing, and four years that I've been a CheckUser. Let me tell you, it gets incredibly tiring. The last thing you want to hear is something like "I totally don't have a battleground attitude! This other group that I intensely dislike is the real problem! They're ruining Wikipedia, and I'm just battling – I mean fixing – their disruption." I can't even bear to finish reading your unblock request. Right around the point where it turns into some kind of rant about deletionists, I tune out no matter how many times I try to read it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:39, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

+1. Beyond that, I'm raising an eyebrow at the complaint about his efforts being "underappreciated." Supermann, there are thousands of productive editors who never get a barnstar, never get a kudo, just plug along with their wikignoming without seeking or expecting their egos to be stroked. I've had multiple months where I've bettered your "15 years" worth of modest editing totals, and that's nothing, because there are high flyers who do far more than I ever could, each and every month of each and every year, and they not only don't expect their egos to be stroked themselves, but they do their work without provoking constant drama. This is a good block. Ravenswing 08:50, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All right criticism! Hearing from experienced editors who have their creations in the past also deleted is refreshing. That’s a great learning experience. Thank you so much for sharing. I finished King Richard on HBOMAX last night. The guy also has a lot of ego problems. I don’t want to be him. I just want to keep my head down and have no drama in my life. While I had thought clarifying my thinking process would only add more context, I now understand people are just fed up with it. I don’t have a lot of desires to create pages anymore. If I can have the ability to just thank others, that is good enough for me, as I don’t have money to donate. Have a good weekend. Supermann (talk) 13:20, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wish you a good luck on your real-life journey. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 04:38, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

U2 Supermann (talk) 14:59, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kingdom of Dust poster.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kingdom of Dust poster.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:14, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Supermann&oldid=1057512021"