Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:47, 22 April 2023

This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles They should not be given alerts for those areas.

This is Throast's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Edit Rejected

Hi

This is regarding the edit Kubra Khan page regarding her name. I think I forgot to give citation. Just for reference here is the citation from Dawn newspaper. Hope this citation is acceptable. Ali Najum (talk) 16:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Ali Najum, it's been a while but that source looks good to me. Please feel free to add the information along with a citation. Throast (talk | contribs) 17:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Move of Wētā companies to Weta

Hi, I noticed you moved Wētā FX and Wētā Workshop to names without the macrons, citing MOS:TM. I don't quite seen it as a trademark stylization since the company was originally named after the wētā, and they decided to switch to the macrons during their renaming, which has been more commonly referred that way closer to the native language: it is spelled either "weta" or "wētā", although the form with macrons is increasingly common in formal writing. It is used in reliable sources for the companies but not universally, similar to something like Löwenbräu Brewery or Citroën where we include the diacritic even if it's not universally used in English sources.

So I guess first off: I wonder if you'd reconsider or explain a bit more your rationale for moving them. Happy editing! (Feel free to move this to a different talk page if you'd rather.) Skynxnex (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Skynxnex, MOS:TM encourages us to choose the style that most closely resembles standard English – regardless of the preference of the trademark owner. Out of "wētā" (spelling originating in the Māori-language) and "weta" (absence of atypical macrons), the latter is preferable. Additionally, having just a cursory look at some recent RS, the former is used in the vast minority of cases. Throast (talk | contribs) 22:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I had forgotten that in the case of Weta Workshop, there was a RM on 9 September 2021 that successfully moved from Weta Workshop to Wētā Workshop, without opposition, so there probably should be a full move request process to move it back. (Edited to add: and that RM was what I based my move of WetaFX to Wētā FX without discussion on 23 May 2022‎.) Skynxnex (talk) 22:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Skynxnex, whoops, my bad. While I disagree with the move, that was obviously not the way to go about it. I did review Talk:Weta FX and didn't see any discussion about the name change, so I thought it'd be uncontroversial. I obviously should have looked at Talk:Weta Workshop as well. Feel free to move it back yourself on the basis of the RM and revert all of my related spelling changes. Throast (talk | contribs) 22:26, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Huh, I had missed the rest of the thread at Misplaced Pages:Teahouse#Getting_a_Wikipedia_page_correctly_indexed_by_Google_Search which makes it seem like the wider consensus may be to keep it macron-less. I may let it sit for a bit and perhaps file a new joint-RM when I have more time to compose it well-enough. Thanks for your thoughts. Skynxnex (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Skynxnex, sounds good. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Throast (talk | contribs) 22:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Change in the article by Marzena Ozarek-Szilke

Hello, I changed from a paleontologist to a paleopathologist because Marzena Ożarek-Szilke neither has courses nor conducts palontological research, she only studies mummies and conducts paleopathological research. I also know she has a big problem because someone created an account for the sole purpose of defaming her and publishing the controversy about her and the team's research. Is there any way to block this person - XEillisx,? 88.156.137.68 (talk) 00:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

What you claim does not contradict the article. As I said in my edit summary, the article says that she took many courses in anthropology, anatomy, and paleontology. This is directly supported by the source, which says, Marzena completed numerous courses and workshops on physical anthropology, anatomy and paleontology. As your version is not supported by the source, I will revert again and ask you to refrain from edit warring.

Regarding your concern about defamatory content, you can report the editor at Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. If you choose to report the editor, please closely follow the instructions at the top of that page. However, note that, as Misplaced Pages articles strive to be neutral and unbiased toward the subject, controversies may be included as long as they are supported by reliable sources. Throast (talk | contribs) 00:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Multiple edit reversions of good edits & lying about facts. Thank you. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me | Contributions). 06:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Robbins/Wonder Woman

Hi. You reverted my Trina Robbins edit. I'm not sure what I am supposed to do here. The original sources currently being used are clearly incorrect. Jan Duursema drew issue 300 of Wonder Woman in 1983. Trina Robbins drew Wonder Woman in 1986. One of these clearly comes three years before the other. Is Misplaced Pages of value if it cites sources that are clearly false? I included a source that mentions Duursema's contribution chronologically (1983). This demonstrates it occurse before Robbins contribution. If the books are not sources - as they are the highest form of accurate information we have - than how can any of the other sources have credibility? 2603:3024:1043:B100:40CA:30C0:2224:DDA4 (talk) 19:54, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, there must be no original research on Misplaced Pages, i.e. editors may not provide their own analysis in articles. That's exactly what you've done here; you conclude that Trina Robbins must be the second woman to draw Wonder Woman based solely on the fact that a source lists another person as the first. Because Trina Robbins isn't explicitly mentioned in the source as the "second woman to draw Wonder Woman", you're conducting original research. If you're convinced that the Vancouver Sun is incorrect, you can remove the information altogether. However, please don't restore your revision unless you can find a source that explicitly supports your claim. I hope that clears things up. Throast (talk | contribs) 20:07, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I started with a simple deletion of the incorrect information as you suggest, but it was reverted as I was deleting "verified" information. Verification from an external source is only of value if the external source is correct. We can see from the publishing dates and the actual book credits (a primary source of information) that the secondary sources of information being used are incorrect. That said, again I am fine with simply deleting the incorrect information - but that will (I suspect) just be reverted).

I get what you are saying about the interpretation of sources. That's stated clearly in guidelines. But guidelines for sourcing also say "Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process."

The fact that Duursema has a credit drawing Wonder Woman (and that this credit IS posted on official, secondary sources - https://dc.fandom.com/Wonder_Woman_Vol_1_300) clearly shows that the information about Robbins (through third-party news sources) is wrong. This just falls under the idea that we is used here should be dictated by common sense first and foremost. 2603:3024:1043:B100:40CA:30C0:2224:DDA4 (talk) 20:21, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I get your point. Still, that's no excuse for adding original research. I'll go ahead and remove the "first woman" claim. If someone restores it again, you can start a discussion at the article talk page. Throast (talk | contribs) 20:26, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Saw your edit. A good way to handle it. Thanks for your patience. 2603:3024:1043:B100:40CA:30C0:2224:DDA4 (talk) 20:33, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I actually didn't mean to remove what you just added; this was due to an edit conflict. Nonetheless, I would choose to remove it altogether because Salon doesn't specify that it was a "mini-series", just a "series". It's all a bit murky, I guess. Throast (talk | contribs) 20:36, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

No, I agree. Your edit was more clear. Thanks. 2603:3024:1043:B100:40CA:30C0:2224:DDA4 (talk) 20:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Grzegorz Braun's political standings.

Hello, you have reverted the changes that removed the claims that Grzegorz Braun was a far-right politician. Although the citations that were meant to prove that only claimed that he was far-right, but never argued for why he is so. In one of the citations, it was said that he fought pro-LGBT propaganda and was against Jewish restitution claims, although those aren't distinct far-right positions, as you can be against both while at the same time holding non-extreme political views, as for instance you can be against Jewish restitution claims not because of the fact that those claims were pushed by this specific group, but because legitimacy for those claims has already expired - making it independent from the group pushing the claim. So this is the part that I don't understand, why were those sources used to prove that he was far-right, when they didn't prove it but only claimed that he was far-right? Is a claim from a popular news article sufficient evidence for wikipedia? Ekcja (talk) 21:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Ekcja, to answer your last question, if the publication is deemed reliable, then, generally, yes. Sources don't have to "prove" anything. If reliable, independent secondary sources commonly describe Braun as "far-right", then Misplaced Pages should reflect that. If you find that individual sources contradict themselves or are otherwise flawed, you can raise the issue at the article talk page and seek other editors' input. Throast (talk | contribs) 22:18, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Sapna Pabbi

I didn't add a reference cause if you click on the movie link that I added, you can see that her name is included in the cast list.

Almost Pyaar with DJ Mohabbat Lopa33 (talk) 13:27, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Lopa33, I addressed this exact issue in my edit summary. Because the credit is unsourced in the film article, you need to provide a source in her article. Cameo appearances are rarely listed in film credits, so the film as a primary source often needs to be supplemented with reliable secondary sources in order to support cameo appearances. Throast (talk | contribs) 13:41, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

How was my edit disruptive?

You claim my edit was disruptive? how so? I think flybe editors just kneejerk reverted stuff without having any expertise in the subject matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.70.174.24 (talk) 07:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

This marked the second time you restored your edit after it was twice reverted, first by CycloneYoris for violating WP:NOR, and then by me for essentially the same reason. Restoring disputed content without discussing the issue productively on other editors' user talk pages or the article talk page is what we call edit warring, which is a form of disruptive editing. Throast (talk | contribs) 21:01, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Jerry Nadler

Hey, you reverted my change a few months ago and I never got a response as to why. It literally makes no sense. He literally is the ranking member, and other chairs are described as being a ranking member, so i dont know why you reverted my change LordEnma8 (talk) 17:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

LordEnma8, I reverted it for the same reason I gave in my edit summary. I see that an IP subsequently re-reverted, and Silikonz eventually added a citation, something you should have done in the first place. Please always add a citation to a reliable source when adding new information, especially if the information relates to living people. Throast (talk | contribs) 17:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

my recent removal

Hi, i don't know how to add the citation, however there should be one on the target page, where the actor's birthday is listed 2600:4040:5163:C500:3F5:A3B3:F1A:2BA9 (talk) 18:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, as you can see at the top of the page when trying to edit the article, it says, Each addition now requires a direct citation from a reliable source on this page supporting it. Simply providing a wikilink is not sufficient and additions without direct sources will be removed. See Misplaced Pages:Citing sources for guidance on citing sources. If the target article contains a reliable source for their birthday, you can just copy-paste it. Throast (talk | contribs) 19:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

RE: Shrek

Your "edits" were absolutely, 100% and unequivocally vandalism. I ask you, what you find wrong with the 100,000 bytes of information you removed? If you see statements that are false, remove/correct those statements ONLY, thank you. Yuotort (talk) 22:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

As a piece of advice, you're not going to last very long accusing good-faith editors of vandalism just because you disagree with their edits. Throast (talk | contribs) 22:44, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Your "edits" were NOT good-faith; you DELETED THE ENTIRE FUCKING PAGE, and are NOT to do any such thing again, thank you. Yuotort (talk) 22:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)