User talk:IJBall/Archive 31
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:IJBall. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 25 | ← | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | → | Archive 35 |
New Page Review newsletter December 2019
- Reviewer of the Year
This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.
Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.
Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.
Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.
| Rank | Username | Num reviews | Log |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rosguill (talk) | 47,395 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 2 | Onel5969 (talk) | 41,883 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 3 | JTtheOG (talk) | 11,493 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 4 | Arthistorian1977 (talk) | 5,562 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 5 | DannyS712 (talk) | 4,866 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 6 | CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk) | 3,995 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 7 | DragonflySixtyseven (talk) | 3,812 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 8 | Boleyn (talk) | 3,655 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 9 | Ymblanter (talk) | 3,553 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 10 | Cwmhiraeth (talk) | 3,522 | Patrol Page Curation |
(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)
- Redirect autopatrol
A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.
- Source Guide Discussion
Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.
- This month's refresher course
While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Merry!
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! |
|
Hello IJBall, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Merry Christmas!
|
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! |
|
Hello IJBall, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Merry Christmas!
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!
Hello, IJBall! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:47, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}
Do we have any reliable sources stating that the game show is over? And not just an "I hear" type statement, of course, like what Deadline Hollywood said about Henry Danger's fifth season before it was made official in that crazy renewal spree last year, but something definitive. Otherwise, we're just going to have to keep reverting at the templates. I'm not going to personally bother with the franchise page, though, since it's "run" by idiots who think it's okay to do things wrong. Amaury • 21:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: They have this. While I can't remember if Summers is an EP/showrunner on the 2018 revival, even if he's not, I don't think it's worth quibbling with his status as a "WP:RS" for this – if Summers says it's over, I believe that it's over. So I personally would not revert the switch of Double Dare back to "former" programming... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:45, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- Amaury & @IJBall: Summers is listed in the credits (at least for the latest episode, "Holiday Week Finals") as an executive producer and "with" (After Koshy is listed as "host"). And while yes, I know it is WP:NOTRS, just mentioning here that a 'Nickelodeon Executive in Charge of Production', Mandel Ilagan, has recently put up a tribute post stating that it is the, "final episode of the #DoubleDare reboot". The live tour also wrapped up recently on December 18 with Summers repeatedly stating that he is not retiring from his career (with multiple projects in the works), but is retiring from Double Dare. Magitroopa (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Magitroopa: I would advise adding that Mandel Ilagan Instagram post as a second source for this (after Summers') at the Double Dare article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:35, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- Amaury & @IJBall: Summers is listed in the credits (at least for the latest episode, "Holiday Week Finals") as an executive producer and "with" (After Koshy is listed as "host"). And while yes, I know it is WP:NOTRS, just mentioning here that a 'Nickelodeon Executive in Charge of Production', Mandel Ilagan, has recently put up a tribute post stating that it is the, "final episode of the #DoubleDare reboot". The live tour also wrapped up recently on December 18 with Summers repeatedly stating that he is not retiring from his career (with multiple projects in the works), but is retiring from Double Dare. Magitroopa (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Season's Greetings
.jpg?lang=en)
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Good luck
Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはIJBallたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 02:41, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Christmas 2019!
Amaury • 18:49, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to the Family TV series pages
Hi, I'd just like to say that I didn't make the original move to a date-based title, however, when I thought it would be best to move the American series page for disambiguation and searchability, I felt that since a country-based title for the Catalan-language series could be controversial, it was best to maintain the standard. I have no problem with the American one having a country-based title, but given the Catalan-language article's country can be debated, I think that title is too controversial. It could be moved to just have "(TV series)", but "2018" probably works fine, so I've moved it back to that. I left a shortened version of this in the edit reason, but thought I'd reach out to explain why it shouldn't have a country title. Kingsif (talk) 22:01, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: WP:NCTV is pretty clear that when you have two series from two different countries (esp. those that premiered within a few years of each other), that "by country" disambiguation is preferred. We also don't do "subnational" disambigaution, so unless and until Catalonia gains independence "Spanish TV series" and "Spanish Catalan-language television series" (in the lede), is correct. You definitely should not have one of a pair disambiguated "by country" and the other disambiguated "by year" – that's just inadvisable practice. As a result, Welcome to the Family (2018 TV series) should be moved back to Welcome to the Family (Spanish TV series)... Pinging Gonnym to this discussion for another opinion. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- One other thing – the bolding in the hatnote is also incorrect, as per MOS:BOLD. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:09, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- I know it's preferred, thanks, but I was saying that the controversy it could cause is something to be considered above said preference. It's easier to just not give the country at all, so there's nothing to fight about. It was made in Spain, sure, but is it 'Spanish'? I'll let someone else chime in to think about that. Kingsif (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- Again, I understand your point, but the fact that "it might be controversial" is not enough of a justification to go contra-WP:NCTV. In the absence of firm evidence, it should be at the "by country" disambiguated title. If somebody has a problem with that, they are free to open up a WP:RM on it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:59, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- I know it's preferred, thanks, but I was saying that the controversy it could cause is something to be considered above said preference. It's easier to just not give the country at all, so there's nothing to fight about. It was made in Spain, sure, but is it 'Spanish'? I'll let someone else chime in to think about that. Kingsif (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Not really an issue, but more of a general question. Is this correct? She was main cast for the first three seasons, before leaving to work on I Didn't Do It. She only special guest starred three times in the fourth season, which as we know does not recurring make. So is that correct? Does her previously being main cast count toward being recurring? Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:56, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- And this. Isn't that the whole point of a list of characters page, so you can not only go into more detail rather than a brief synopsis, but also really list a lot notable characters rather than just a few? In fact, I think that's basically what you stated here: User talk:IJBall/Archive 20#Nicky, Ricky, Dicky & Dawn.
I find including a 'Guest cast' section less objectionable for a LoC article.
. Although in our cases, we're limiting it to notable guest stars only. Those who receive a special guest star credit automatically qualify as notable, and then from there we go with who we think is notable—for example, main cast from a fellow series on the same network guest starring on another series makes them notable. At the very least, shouldn't it be discussed before outright removing it? Note that I'm not the one who added it, I just changed it to "Notable guest stars" so we're not listing every single non-recurring guest star, as that definitely does become excessive. I accordingly simultaneously added and removed from the original list. Courtesy ping for AngusWOOF so they can provide their thoughts, as they are the ones responsible for removing the section, and also because they participated in that semi-related discussion at Geraldo Perez's talk page here: User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 16#How to list guest stars when actor and/or character name changes?. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- Regarding Kim in season 4, three appearances in that season could be recurring, but depends on how the editors for the series define recurring. Some go with 2 or more separate storyline appearances in a season, others are 3 or more. As for guest stars, I removed that from the List of Characters since those are usually stated on the episode lists themselves. For the names, yeah, we can go back to the discussion in the archive. I might have gotten some of those wrong, but it's definitely not appropriate to have "Sensei Ty / Ty". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:52, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
- @AngusWOOF: Sorry for the incredibly late response.
As for guest stars, I removed that from the List of Characters since those are usually stated on the episode lists themselves.
That doesn't seem like a valid or logical reason for removal and I will have to respectfully disagree. If we are to use that logic, we shouldn't be listing recurring guest stars, either, since they're listed in the episode list as well. When there isn't enough content for a separate character list page, you typically only include main and recurring stars on the parent article, though you can include notable guest stars as well, provided you state which episodes they appear in. Additionally, bios should generally be brief. Then when or if a character list page is created, that's where you can not only go into a lot more detail in the bios, but also list a lot more non-recurring guest stars, within reason. We should not list every single non-recurring guest star, only the notable ones. Those who receive a special guest star credit are automatically notable. Likewise, if a main cast member from one series guest stars on another series on the same network or franchise, that also makes them automatically notable. For example, Kelli Berglund guest starring as Sloane on Kickin' It is notable because she is a main cast member on Lab Rats, and both series are from Disney XD. Similarly, Milo Manheim guest starring as Pierce on ABC's American Housewife is also notable because he is a main cast member on Disney Channel's Zombies, and ABC and Disney Channel are both part of the Disney network franchise. After that, for non-recurring guest stars who fall into neither of those categories, it should be discussed why they are considered notable. For example, a guest star from one series guest starring on another series on the same network is not necessarily notable. While I can certainly look at cutting back what I had a little for anyone who doesn't fit into those two categories I mentioned, I don't think outright removing the section is the answer. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- @AngusWOOF: Sorry for the incredibly late response.
Happy New Year, IJBall!
IJBall,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— YoungForever(talk) 00:48, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
A new decade begins
I'm a day late, but...
.jpg?lang=en)
-
MMXX Lunar Calendar
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.
– 2020 is a leap year – news article.
– Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year
– Amaury • 19:48, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
How did my edit violate MOS:ACCESS?
I am not sure what you meant when my edit on Katrina Law's article violated the MOS:ACCESS rowspan violation. I looked on that page, but couldn't find anything regarding that. I have done this before on other celebrity pages (e.g. Grant Gustin, Melissa Benoist), and no one complained. Could you care to explain that more in detail? That way I will know for future reference. Eightsixofakina (talk) 07:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Please just search my Talk page archives for "MOS:ACCESS" – you'll find your answers there. And, yes – many people do this wrong: that's why WP:OSE is a "thing". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
A series I watched many years ago called Supernanny has returned, but I'm not sure how the episodes should be added on Wikipedia (similar to recent things like Double Dare and All That reboots/revivals). Most of the factors are leading me to believe they should be added on as season 8, rather than a completely new series. The series is no longer aired on ABC, but is instead now aired on Lifetime. The original host, Jo Frost, is back as the host again, and other signs point towards this being labelled as a season 8 such as Futon Critic listing the production codes under "#8__" and the official Lifetime website labels the season under season 8. Also seems like Zap2it agrees with it being a continuation of the series. Thanks in advance. Magitroopa (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
- First, a rant – I absolutely hate that all of these years-later "reboots" are being counted as "new seasons" of old TV series, instead of as separate ("revival") series. That applies to everything you just listed, as well as The X-Files, Twin Peaks, Will & Grace, Prison Break, etc. – each one of these should be considered a "new" (separate) TV series, IMO.
- Now, Magitroopa, with that out of the way, considering the precedents on Wikipedia, and your evidence, I would just list it as a new "season"...
--IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:27, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response last night. Now another thing- the tables used for season 1-7 aren't even
Episode table, but are instead made out of wikitables, so I am going to be getting those all properly fixed up as well so the entire page can be good. Starting off with season one though, should UK episodes be listed too? Currently seems to skip over them, but Zap2it and Futon Critic lists #109, "Collins Family (U.K. Family)", so I would think it's fine to add those one as they seem to be included in the mix... (The episode is listed as episode 1 of series 2 of the UK version, and seems to have premiered at the same time, as Futon lists it for 4/4/2005 and the UK Wiki table lists it for 4/5/2005). other episodes missing I'll probably add on including #112, "Family Update Special". Magitroopa (talk) 05:25, 3 January 2020 (UTC)- No idea how to handle that. It sounds like they were episodes of the British series first, that were "repurposed" by the American series. I'm not sure those should be listed in the table, or if they should just be mentioned in prose as "rebroadcasts" of episodes from the UK series. I would check as many sources as you can find – not just Futon, but TV Guide, and and others – to see how they treat the UK episodes. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hey, just wanted to respond to this: After tons of work, mostly from Zap2it & Futon, I've finally updated the page entirely. No more Wikitables, all headers filled in, networks now listed in series overview, etc. I've also included the spinoff episodes that were included previously into a new specials section, and the UK episodes do seem to count towards the total, because the season 6 episode titled "100th Episode Special" perfectly fits in as episode #100. Glad that the page will actually be in the proper format now! Magitroopa (talk) 05:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
- I'd replace the current page with your Sandbox version then. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hey, just wanted to respond to this: After tons of work, mostly from Zap2it & Futon, I've finally updated the page entirely. No more Wikitables, all headers filled in, networks now listed in series overview, etc. I've also included the spinoff episodes that were included previously into a new specials section, and the UK episodes do seem to count towards the total, because the season 6 episode titled "100th Episode Special" perfectly fits in as episode #100. Glad that the page will actually be in the proper format now! Magitroopa (talk) 05:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
- No idea how to handle that. It sounds like they were episodes of the British series first, that were "repurposed" by the American series. I'm not sure those should be listed in the table, or if they should just be mentioned in prose as "rebroadcasts" of episodes from the UK series. I would check as many sources as you can find – not just Futon, but TV Guide, and and others – to see how they treat the UK episodes. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response last night. Now another thing- the tables used for season 1-7 aren't even
Neutral notice
As an editor who commented at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film between Jan. 1, 2019, and today, you may wish to join a discussion at that page, here.--Tenebrae (talk) 00:07, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
A Move Request from Draft:Penny Dreadful: City of Angels to Penny Dreadful: City of Angels
Hi IJBall,
Can you move Draft:Penny Dreadful: City of Angels to Penny Dreadful: City of Angels without leaving a redirect? Filming began months ago and there is a premiere date now. — YoungForever(talk) 20:41, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- @YoungForever:
Done. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Not a page move request, but a page review/page triage request...
Hey Ian,
I'm one of your ~99 talk page stalkers, so just noticed your recent actioning of the above user's request. I see you've also got new page review privileges, so was wondering if you are able to filter for the redirect page I created and mark it as "reviewed"?
Cheers,
--Doug Mehus T·C 00:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Dmehus: Which redirect? And is there any background/history that I should know about? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:41, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- IJBall, Not really...it is Sandringham Summit. It's similar to the Sussex Royal page that Britishfinance created and the SussexRoyal.com redirect that I created (both of which redirect to Megxit). In Sandringham Summit's case, which is also a trending term, I've redirected it to an embedded anchor. Consensus is trending storngly to keep-ing Megxit as is. The other redirects were all marked as "reviewed." Doug Mehus T·C 00:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- IJBall, I ask you only because you're in (I think) the same time zone as me and Britishfinance is, I'm guessing, sleeping. Doug Mehus T·C 00:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Dmehus: Reviewed, as this seems non-controversial. For an unsolicited opinion – the base article shouldn't remain at "Megxit", IMO, though I have no idea what the article title should be. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:49, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- IJBall, Yeah, there's some debate about whether it should be renamed. Consensus is also trending towards keeping it as is for now, similar to Brexit and Wexit/Wexit Canada. Thanks for reviewing it! For clarity, is there two kinds of page reviews? When I refreshed the page curation log, I didn't see your name show up with the usual PageTriage tag. Doug Mehus T·C 00:51, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- IJBall, Feel free to weigh in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megxit, if you want. Do you participate in XfDs much? Doug Mehus T·C 00:52, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sometimes, though I don't feel it should be deleted. I do, however, think it should be moved. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Dmehus:
I am having a problem with a series of disruptive IPs at this article. One big problem that stands out is their eliminating the middle initial in Macaulay Culkin's character of "Thomas J. Sennett" in both the plot and the cast listing. The middle initial is part of the name in the film's ending credits. I also identify "Thomas J." as the character's MOS:COMMONNAME from how he's referred to in the film. I'll let you look at these diffs I had a problem with: [1][2][3]. I would be tempted to take this to WP:RPP, but with the time spacing between these edits, I doubt semiprotection would be helpful right now. MPFitz1968 (talk) 00:31, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- @MPFitz1968: I do advise taking it to WP:RfPP then – if you think they won't go for Semi-protection, ask for (longer-term) Pending changes protection. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:33, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- I have asked for pending changes protection after this edit (Request at RPP). MPFitz1968 (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
- To add to what IJBall said, whenever I've requested semi-protection, or even full protection in some cases, I always start short. Ask for a week or less and you'll usually get at least a couple days semi- or full-protection, if that's required, as long as there's at least more than a couple instances of vandalism in a short time span. Also, ask only for the protection needed. In the case of Sharyl Attkisson and Spider-Man: Far From Home, full protection was necessary because of edit warring and content disputes between extendedconfirmed users. (talk page stalker) Doug Mehus T·C 00:46, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Melanie Scrofano edit of 1 child to 2 children
IJBall, I apologize for editing Melanie Scrofano’s child information, I do know for a fact that she does have 2 sons with her husband Jeff. I don’t know any other way of providing proof other then to tell you to watch her social posts, and her Twitter account. I have met Melanie Scrofano numerous times and she has spoken of her 2 children. I was under the assumption that because the edit button was in service to me and the information was incorrect that I then had permission to use it! I apologize if this is not true, I honestly would never edit anything that was not true or that I didn’t know as fact! I would ask you to be a bit kinder in asking others not to change or edit information, you come off very insolent. Also is there a reason why I have the ability to edit and when I do so I am told not too, I truly don’t understand the process, if you would be so kind to explain this for me, I would very much appreciate this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auntcar9 (talk • contribs) 09:15, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- My response would be that you shouldn't ignore edit summaries that tell you to read the Talk page – there was a reason I told you that.
- The issue here is that there has been no unambiguous source for Scrofano having two children – either in interviews or in her own social media. In the absence of that, we cannot report it on Wikipedia, as without sourcing it's a WP:BLP violation. Bottom line: This falls under WP:Verifiability, not truth – all information, esp. in WP:BLP articles, must be strictly verifiable with sourcing, and without that it must be left out. Until there is an unambiguous source for the two children thing, we cannot include it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Thomas Doherty
I'm a tad confused by your reversion of my edit on Doherty's page – I always believed that while on the article of a British subject, British English should be used consistently, even despite an American series being described. For example, on Jaylen Barron, I'd never describe Free Rein as having three "series", I'd use "seasons", while on Céline Buckens, I'd use "series". Can you explain? – DarkGlow (talk) 18:30, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I get 'use British English', but that's primarily for, for example, things like using "colour" over "color" in the article prose. The problem with what you're wanting to do is that it's confusing – anyone who clicks on the Legacies (TV series) article won't find a "Series 2" section: they'll find a "Season 2" section. So, for things like the 'Filmography' table, we should use the same terminology as is in the TV series article.
- Incidentally, I'd argue the exact same thing for an American actor who appeared on a British TV series: the 'Filmography" table should read "Recurring role (series 2)" for that (to match the TV series article terminology), rather than "Recurring role (season 2)" just because the actor is American.
- So that would be an exception to something like 'use British English' – we should use terms consistent with the TV series article itself, to avoid unnecessary confusiuon. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
@Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968: New Disney Channel series. Amaury • 18:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Previous rowspan discussion
Pinging @SNUGGUMS: as well, I saw there was a previous discuss here about the use of rowspans in filmographies and taking out the sentence "Use of rowspan formatting in "Year" columns (ex. #2) is acceptable, but rowspan formatting should not be used in other columns, per WP:ACCESS." but I didn't see any consensus and it was left alone. For years, rowspans were banned for any filmography, year column included which I was glad, I just find them ugly. I don't want to bring it up again if the issue was just discussed and didn't get any traction but I'd like to know what you both think about bringing it up again? LADY LOTUS • TALK 21:24, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- My prior opposition towards rowspans in filmography tables remains the same. Restrictions on them shouldn't have been lifted in the first place. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Unfortunately, I doubt there's strong enough consensus to disallow their use in 'Filmography' tables entirely (though there does seem to be consensus to disallow inappropriate/incorrect use of
rowspanvis a vis MOS:ACCESS and screenreaders, as per the current wording which does have strong support...). Whilerowspanof 'Year' column makes sense in other contexts (e.g. in 'Awards' tables where some actors can receive 10 or 20 different awards/nominations in the same year), I definitely feel that in the overwhelming majority of 'Filmography' tables even in the 'Year' column,rowspanuse is completely pointless and accomplishes nothing... But without strong consensus at the WP:FILMBIO level, it's likely to devolve to a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS question at each article. However, do be aware – there are some named account and IP vandals that will disruptively addrowspaneven whether there's no consensus for it, and they should just be plainly reverted. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:02, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
@IJBall:
As a non-involved page moving editor, I was wondering if you would be able to move South End (disambiguation) --> South End over the redirect, following my determination of consensus and closing the discussion?
Thanks,
--Doug Mehus T·C 12:31, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Ping Geraldo Perez as well. I'm learning toward removing the content of the latest edit, but I wanted to raise it here first before I did. It's obviously a good faith edit, but it's not correct. 1) There's no credit with "X as The Narrator" or "Narrated by" or any form of, so we have nothing saying Jenna Ortega is a narrator. 2) She is not narrating the story. She is simply breaking the fourth wall. Stuck in the Middle is akin to Malcolm in the Middle, where Malcolm (Frankie Muniz) does the same thing. Actual narrating is what Young Sheldon and The Kids Are Alright do, with Jim Parsons and Tim Doyle, respectively. The actors don't physically appear in the series and are simply narrating with their voices. Additionally, they both do have narration credits, so using the narrated_by parameter is appropriate there, but not for Stuck in the Middle. So I'm pretty sure I will be reverting as good faith, unless one of you wants to do it, but I wanted to raise it here first. Amaury • 06:55, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Definitely in agreement that without any "narrated by" credit in the individual episodes, it doesn't belong in the infobox. There appear to be points in each episode where Jenna Ortega (Harley) is saying what she's thinking, aside from when we actually see her talking thru her character (including the breaking of the fourth wall), and that's what Starforce13 may be going by. While that may be true, without an official credit of narration, it just simply shouldn't be mentioned in the article. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:36, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- For the record, I decided to revert the edit. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:51, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- I'm convinced - mostly by Amaury - that we shouldn't treat fourth wall breaking as narration. In that case, I'm guessing the same should be done for grown-ish since it's the exact same structure where Zoey is simply breaking the fourth wall and there's no separate credit for "narrated by." Starforce13 14:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Starforce13: Yeah, if there are no narration credits of any kind, then whoever wouldn't be a narrator, unless you had a secondary source claiming so, but even then, primary sources supersede secondary sources when it comes to names and credits, especially if the secondary source was from before the series premiered as things could have changed. It can be mentioned in prose that so and so was planned to be narrator, but it could have been that it was later changed to have no narrator and there would be fourth wall breaking instead or there would no narrator and that's it, in which case, the narrated_by parameter wouldn't be added. Why it's like that for Grown-ish I have no idea, but it should be fixed. Amaury • 15:11, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- There should be an explicit narrated by credit before listing it in the infobox. Generally if an actor has a character credit, they don't get a narrator credit. Narrator is normally credited in documentaries for people like David Attenborough, rare for fiction. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed. Thanks! Starforce13 17:09, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- There should be an explicit narrated by credit before listing it in the infobox. Generally if an actor has a character credit, they don't get a narrator credit. Narrator is normally credited in documentaries for people like David Attenborough, rare for fiction. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Starforce13: Yeah, if there are no narration credits of any kind, then whoever wouldn't be a narrator, unless you had a secondary source claiming so, but even then, primary sources supersede secondary sources when it comes to names and credits, especially if the secondary source was from before the series premiered as things could have changed. It can be mentioned in prose that so and so was planned to be narrator, but it could have been that it was later changed to have no narrator and there would be fourth wall breaking instead or there would no narrator and that's it, in which case, the narrated_by parameter wouldn't be added. Why it's like that for Grown-ish I have no idea, but it should be fixed. Amaury • 15:11, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
- I'm convinced - mostly by Amaury - that we shouldn't treat fourth wall breaking as narration. In that case, I'm guessing the same should be done for grown-ish since it's the exact same structure where Zoey is simply breaking the fourth wall and there's no separate credit for "narrated by." Starforce13 14:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Henry Danger
Something interesting. The generic credits Nickelodeon uses had this before the rest of the credits rolled for "Theranos Boot." I don't know if it's like this in the true end credits, but...
Season 5
Amaury • 05:03, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Episode #532
"Theranos Boot"
Final on-air credits A/O 12/09/19
- Are you able to confirm this? I already deleted the episode after watching it. If it's just co-producer, he doesn't get listed. Amaury • 00:03, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- I can't, as I already watched both of those episodes, and don't have either on my DVR. However, that should be easy to check, with reruns and the Nick app... However, I am also skeptical, so it needs to be checked. (On my end, I'm not getting to that this week!!...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:24, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
"A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro)" listed at Requested moves
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the requested move of A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro) and other Metro pages. Since you had some involvement with pages related to A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro) and others, you might want to participate in the discussion if you wish to do so. Lexlex (talk) 11:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Starklinson's at it again. Amaury • 18:38, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
- Ping Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968 as well. Amaury • 18:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
- The latter has already gotten through New Page Patrol. I'm inclined to leave the former to NPP as well. Both would likely need to go to WP:AfD, and both would be borderline cases. Once again, while I wouldn't have created either, they are borderline enough that they're not certain "deletes" at AfD... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
- We really need to tighten down on BLPs, in my opinion. Amaury • 18:52, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
@Geraldo Perez: I could use more eyes here. Fanboys strike again. Elijah is being disruptive and making OR assumptions. Zap2it has an air date, so we list it. If nothing happens on that date or the info is updated before that date, then we'll update it, but if we have the information, there's no reason not to list it. We cannot not list things simply because one user says that's wrong. That's not how Wikipedia works. Add: I've already dished out a warning on their talk page; anything further will result in a couple more warnings or going straight to a report, depending on the severity. Amaury • 17:06, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Sleeper
Ping. Talk:She's_All_That#Sleeper_Hit? -- 109.76.133.195 (talk) 12:10, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
- I saw it. You tracked down even more sources that call it a "sleeper hit". So my opinion hasn't changed – it should stay in Rachael Leigh Cook (and should actually be restored to She's All That) unless there is consensus for its removal. And right now, there isn't. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
- Please comment on the article talk page. (I think we will should to ask for other opinions.) -- 109.76.133.62 (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm about ready to go to RFPP. The source used does have those names, but it doesn't say who portrays who, so it's best to leave it out, and it is not my responsibility to find a newer source, though I will end up doing at some point. Probably this week when I get a chance. Amaury • 01:38, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd try taking it to RfPP, though finding a good source for that first would be the better option... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:30, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
"iDate A Bad Boy" - article about an iCarly episode
I don't see this as passing WP:NEPISODE. Should this be marked speedy or AfD? (Also, the user creating the article didn't use proper convention for titles, the "A" shouldn't be capitalized.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- @MPFitz1968: I'd just boldly convert it to a redirect. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- Done. Article is now a redirect to the episode in iCarly (season 2). MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:56, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
- @MPFitz1968: I've restored the redirect. If the author reverts again, I would suggest taking it to WP:AfD, as there is not enough here (at this point) to indicate a standalone article is necessary or justified here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Can you find anything that seems to prove or even mention this? Or is this just another IP either trolling or having wishful thinking because they're perhaps gay themselves? Similar to that IP who wanted Olivia Sanabia to marry them here? Amaury • 05:18, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- Asher Angel is the one who's supposedly dating a famous YouTube personality – I very much doubt this is true. Revert on sight – unsourced, it's a WP:BLP vio either way. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:34, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
We should of course wait for something official from a reliable source, but look here. That would be the first time a series sent to the burnoff channel is renewed. Maybe there's hope for I Am Frankie? Amaury • 17:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- Probably not. I can't figure out why they keep renewing HS – I thought season #3, with most of the originals gone, was really poor. I would much rather have had another season of Frankie... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Guess who's shown up here? Is this even necessary? Amaury • 17:01, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- It improves the layout, so I'd leave it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: I agree with IJBall. It brings the image closer to the descriptions of the characters shown. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020
Hello IJBall,
- Source Guide Discussion
The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.
- Redirects
New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.
- Discussions and Resources
- There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
- A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
- A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
- A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.
- Refresher
Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello,
I was wondering if we could discuss the recent edit I made to Sofia Black D’Elia’s page. I’m unclear about which information was poor or incorrect. I read over the DOB page, which makes sense. But I don’t know what was wrong with the rest.
Thank you,
Apathyash (talk) 01:07, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Apathyash: Aside from the DOB edit, all of the edits to the Filmography were either unnecessary, or contrary to WP:FILMOGRAPHY. The Mick and Your Honor edits were fine. The "outspoken supporter of women's rights" addition was probably WP:UNDUE, and was not a particularly strong source. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Firstsies
So I had my first ever tire blowout yesterday. And on the freeway. Amaury • 17:36, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- I've been fortunate that I've never had a blown tire yet. Really not looking forward to it happening... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:14, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- Or maybe not. I dunno. My mom thinks it would be all shredded if we had blown it, but it's just flat, so not entirely sure. All I know is that I was driving on the freeway and suddenly felt like something had "exploded." I didn't lose control or anything, but it's like ran over something, like a board or something. But I did not see anything in my lane, unless I somehow missed it. Amaury • 00:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Zombies 2 film
For your reference for the DCOM page, item #4 here Archived 2020-02-18 at the Wayback Machine. Amaury • 21:42, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Ping Geraldo Perez for the ratings info source. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Template:Infobox television – show_name parameter appears to be irrelevant now
Seems that the header of the infobox now pulls from the page title, as leaving the parameter blank or removing it entirely no longer removes the series name. Amaury • 00:29, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I've just had to remove plenty of info from this newly created article. Yes, they've been advertising the premiere date of February 29 on TV, but no official source or press release other than Nickelodeon promos on TV (I know they're WP:NOTRS, but just incase you haven't seen any Nickelodeon this weekend, example 1 and example 2 of promos).
Also, what should be done about the title? List of programs broadcast by Nickelodeon currently has it as "Tyler Perry's Young Dylan" as per this source, but I'm not sure how that's usually handled. Can't think of any Nickelodeon shows off the top of my head with this scenario, but other Tyler Perry projects use the "Tyler Perry's" and don't have that part in the articles (or sometimes include an "Also known as" in the infobox).
It also seems like a bit of a WP:TOOSOON, I was thinking the article should for right now just be a redirect to List of programs broadcast by Nickelodeon#Live-action series until some more information is known/some PR comes out. I also had to remove the 'plot' section from the article because it was 100% WP:COPYVIO from here, and removed the episode section/table since it had literally no source for writer, director, or the title itself to begin with. Thanks in advance. Magitroopa (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Magitroopa: First, outside of Tyler Perry's House of Payne, none of his other TV series are at "Tyler Perry's..." as their article title – so this one should be at Young Dylan not at Tyler Perry's Young Dylan. Second, based on the Nick promos and the Feb. 29 premiere date, this series should clear WP:TVSHOW easily (i.e. as a show in production with an established premiere date), so it's not WP:TOOSOON on that basis... Third, the article is absolutely under-sourced right now, but other secondary sources are out there – e.g. Deadline: [4], [5]; Variety: [6]; and THR: [7]. So the current article can be better sourced, and likely expanded. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
@Magitroopa and Amaury: More info on Young Dylan, Kamp Koral, and a Henry Danger spinoff(!?!): here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:16, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- Interesting... They also intend another "season" of Are You Afraid of the Dark? – I wonder if it'll be the same cast from the recent miniseries, or a new cast... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:19, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- Yep, plenty of renewals all around! Interesting that they're going FoP-route for The Loud House 'movie' and having it be live-action. I must say, Danger Force isn't that unexpected for me, as Nowak, Caron, Barnes, and Cohen have all posted teaser images on their Instagrams in the past 24 hours, but I wasn't expecting it to come next month already. Magitroopa (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- I'm really confused by the name of the spinoff – shouldn't it be called Man Force?! Kid Danger's not involved! Why is is called "Danger Force"?!!
--IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:39, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- I mean, Jace Norman is involved as a producer for the series, so in that aspect, he's still kind of there, even if his character is not. Amaury • 18:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- I'm really confused by the name of the spinoff – shouldn't it be called Man Force?! Kid Danger's not involved! Why is is called "Danger Force"?!!
- Yep, plenty of renewals all around! Interesting that they're going FoP-route for The Loud House 'movie' and having it be live-action. I must say, Danger Force isn't that unexpected for me, as Nowak, Caron, Barnes, and Cohen have all posted teaser images on their Instagrams in the past 24 hours, but I wasn't expecting it to come next month already. Magitroopa (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- IJBall, I'm pretty sure I already created a page for this, which the creating user of course failed to look for. (Doesn't surprise me.) But I cannot find it easily. Is there a way to see pages you created? Amaury • 17:39, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Pages created tools: XTools and ∑ (Sigma) (not sure the latter is still maintained...).
This is the definite advantage of creating articles in WP:Draftspace – they are much easier to find (for both you, and other editors) than articles you create in your own userspace. There is also a way to get a complete list of pages in your userspace, but I can never remember how to do it... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)- That doesn't really help, as it doesn't seem like there is a way to restrict it to draftspace. However, I filtered my contribs to October, which is when the announcement was announced (early October), and I'm not seeing it. I definitely remember this article, but perhaps I never got around to creating the page? I could have sworn I did. Well, the article that exists now will be cleaned up for sure, as I see plenty of things wrong with it. Amaury • 18:24, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Pages created tools: XTools and ∑ (Sigma) (not sure the latter is still maintained...).
@Amaury and IJBall: Erm... I thought it was established that, "none of his other TV series are at "Tyler Perry's..." as their article title – so this one should be at Young Dylan not at Tyler Perry's Young Dylan"?... I'm guessing that this is due to the entire thing being italicized in the NickPress press release, but Futon Critic just quotes the main part of the title, being "Young Dylan". Magitroopa (talk) 19:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- See the latest Deadline Hollywood article here. See also the contents of that article you linked to above from The Futon Critic.
In Tyler Perry's Young Dylan, Dylan's grandmother Viola (Aloma Wright) realizes...
AndTyler Perry's Young Dylan underscores a key element of Nickelodeon's content...
Emphasis mine. Amaury • 19:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm also guessing you removed Futon Critic from the hidden references because it should be added only once episodes are actually listed there? Magitroopa (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- If we had what we usually have sometimes, with an episode listed that just has the date, but no title or production code, it would make more sense, as we could then use it as a column source early. But otherwise it's pointless to include it, even hidden, when there are no episodes listed. Amaury • 19:58, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Ping Geraldo Perez as well. Is this fair use? Amaury • 18:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- No idea. I let the people on Commons figure it out – if it's not fair use, someone will delete it, and I'll worry about it then... It's only if someone is replacing an existing valid image with a shaky-rights one that I usually revert. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:17, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: It's free-use. It is a screencap from a YouTube video that has a proper free-use license. Look at the description on the YouTube source, license is there. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Geraldo Perez: Thank you. I did see that, but I'm never sure on that, so I'm always double-checking. Amaury • 18:49, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: It's free-use. It is a screencap from a YouTube video that has a proper free-use license. Look at the description on the YouTube source, license is there. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Jessie
I still have to finish the main article cleanup, but in terms of the characters page, I think it's ready to be created in mainspace. The ones without bios can always be expanded later by others, and the notable ones in there were all approved by you. Amaury • 17:21, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- I would try to find some secondary sources first (and I'd think some can be pretty easily be found – I think I remember some Jessie guest castings getting coverage) – with secondary sources, no one is likely to challenge it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:35, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- I'm almost done with the main article. I just have a few more sections to fill in. Would you take a look and make sure sections and sub-sections are ordered correctly and the awards and soundtracks tables are MOS compliant? Thanks. Amaury • 18:54, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: That's a pretty radical change from the current Jessie (2011 TV series) article – I can't tell you've just left out sections (e.g. 'Casting') from the latter that you don't intend to change, or if you intend to cut those sections... Regardless, I'd post to Talk:Jessie (2011 TV series) first, declaring the changes you intend to make first, because I don't think boldly reworking an existing article like that is going to be controversy free – better to let people know about it first. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:12, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- Basically what I did is consolidate all of the information to the production section. Unlike broadcast series, Nickelodeon and Disney Channel don't really have enough information to separate things out into development, casting, and filming sections; otherwise, it would just be sections with one or two lines of text each—other than the production section—and that's not really the best way. Also, instead of re-using what was there via copying and pasting like the other sections and then tidying them up, I re-wrote the production section entirely from scratch. I can and certainly will look into re-using what was there, but it likely still wouldn't be enough content. And a lot of times I don't re-use what was there during my cleanups, because it's a mess. Amaury • 20:42, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Amaury: That's a pretty radical change from the current Jessie (2011 TV series) article – I can't tell you've just left out sections (e.g. 'Casting') from the latter that you don't intend to change, or if you intend to cut those sections... Regardless, I'd post to Talk:Jessie (2011 TV series) first, declaring the changes you intend to make first, because I don't think boldly reworking an existing article like that is going to be controversy free – better to let people know about it first. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:12, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- I'm almost done with the main article. I just have a few more sections to fill in. Would you take a look and make sure sections and sub-sections are ordered correctly and the awards and soundtracks tables are MOS compliant? Thanks. Amaury • 18:54, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Why doesn't this surprise me?
It doesn't surprise me now, but of course, the one time I don't have suspicions, it turns out that someone is a sock. Of Simulation, in this case. See here. Amaury • 20:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm on the edge of taking the article to WP:RPP. Having problems with disruptive IPs at this one. I've already reverted some content four times there in less than 24 hours, but the last two were pretty much vandalism with them adding a template that's supposed to be used only on talk pages to request an edit on a protected article. Aside from that, what do you make of the rest of the edit here? Clearly unsourced content, but I think there's more in this addition that makes it not only unsourced, but dubious. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:08, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- @MPFitz1968: Looks like straight up WP:VAND to me – I would take it to WP:RfPP. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:07, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- Just sent request for semiprotection after yet another IP edit with the same kind of disruption. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:33, 23 February 2020 (UTC)