Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:36, 4 June 2017

A Barnstar for you

		The Writer's Barnstar
		For your excellent work creating character articles for A Song of Ice and Fire. Keep up the great work! IdenticalHetero (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Game of Thrones

The article Game of Thrones you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Game of Thrones for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 23:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Peter Dinklage

The article Peter Dinklage you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Peter Dinklage for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of RL0919 -- RL0919 (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

True Detective

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Misplaced Pages Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 04:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Yay.. thanks for the review and all. - AffeL (talk) 11:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of True Detective

The article True Detective you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:True Detective for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Jon Snow

Hi, I made a few edits on Kit Harington's page. I saw you nominated it for GA. Great job! I hope to see it pass. Let me know if you have any questions. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. - AffeL (talk) 14:07, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Kit Harington

Here's my thought process. This is either a) Kit Harington, not wanting to publicise his relationship with Rose Leslie on Misplaced Pages, b) the reverse, c) a vandal screwing about. WP:AGF says we can't choose option c) if a) and b) are within the bounds of plausibility. If the IP comes back again, drop me a line and I'll have a look - if they're not prepared to communicate with us though, we can't do anything. Ritchie333 12:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Both Kit and Rose have been public about their relationship(See:(Min: 4.24) and ) If the ip user comes back, I will inform you. - AffeL (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

What if they've just had an almighty row and split up? Not that I would wish that to happen particularly, but sometimes that's just the way life goes. Ritchie333 12:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

They where seen togheter just a day ago at an event in England, as a couple, holding hands and kissing. So, I don't believe they have parted ways, Even if they hade, a source is needed to confirm it. - AffeL (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

And they said romance was dead :-) ... okay, I'm leaning more towards option c) now. Ritchie333 13:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

:-D AffeL (talk) 13:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Of course, in my warped imagination I have thought of d) a 27-year old bespectacled geek with suspicious facial hair who can't stand that that beastly Mr Harington had the gall to date the delectable Ms Leslie and decides to blank all mention on the internet to make him feel better. However, in practical terms that is close enough to c) anyway, and also d) is more likely not to be an anon IP, but an admin on Commons. (ooooh) Ritchie333 13:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Hahah...Yeah, I would not be surprised if that was the case. - AffeL (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: The suspicious facial hair guy is back. - AffeL (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Banhammered. Ritchie333 14:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333:. That guy is back, using another ip adress. Wow, he really can't stand Harington and Leslie being a couple. - AffeL (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Right, protected it for a week. That should keep things at bay. Ritchie333 18:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

References

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0YbPrLdyeg
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA1t6o1IsrQ

Barnstar for you

		The Special Barnstar
		This Special Barnstar is for all the hard work you have done on List of awards and nominations received by Game of Thrones during the last few months. Kingstoken (talk) 23:56, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kit Harington

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kit Harington you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Numerounovedant -- Numerounovedant (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Verifiability

Hey, I was looking at our Davos Seaworth article last night (I wanted to find out how to spell Salidor Sand's name, as I was curious about the actor playing him), and I noticed the article had serious problems, even by the standards of our stand-alone articles on "A Song of Ice and Fire" characters, and it turns out that you were in no small part responsible, apparently having removed more maintenance tags without addressing the problems. Removing maintenance tags that you presumably think are unnecessary is one thing (you should at least provide an edit summary, though), but this edit was way out of line: you replaced a citation needed tag with a citation that actually said the opposite of the claim you were supposedly verifying. I've noticed a lot of your recent edits to the Game of Thrones article had similar problems.

You should really familiarize yourself with our verifiability policy (as well as our guidelines regarding reliable sources). If not ... well, your behaviour on these articles, as well as the fact that you advertise your GA/FA noms on your user page, very much reminds me of another editor, and they didn't last very long once the community realized how problematic their edits were.

You must be more careful about only adding material to Misplaced Pages that can be verified in reliable sources, and not reading into sources whatever you want them to say. A good way to go about this is to just forget whatever you thought a source would say before reading it, read it, and then add what it actually says regardless of whether it says what you thought it would.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

By the way: If I see you referring to non-disruptive, good-faith edits by established contributors as "vandal edits" again, I will ask that you be blocked. Accusing established editors of vandalism without evidence is a serious WP:CIVIL-violation. I agree with User:Curly Turkey's statement that your edit history may need to be examined. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:36, 4 June 2017 (UTC)