User talk:Atlantic306: Difference between revisions
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
==Re create== |
==Re create== |
||
Please make [[Bhamatsar]] article available on Wikipedia. But the article was correct but the article was removed due to the creation of ban user. Just as you created [[Dulchasar]], make a [[ |
Please make [[Bhamatsar]] article available on Wikipedia. But the article was correct but the article was removed due to the creation of ban user. Just as you created [[Dulchasar]], make a [[Bhamatsar]] article as well. |
||
[[Special:Contributions/223.188.133.81|223.188.133.81]] ([[User talk:223.188.133.81|talk]]) 08:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC) |
[[Special:Contributions/223.188.133.81|223.188.133.81]] ([[User talk:223.188.133.81|talk]]) 08:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 08:45, 29 April 2020
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Vambu Sandai - Discussion
Please take part in the merger discussion for Vambu Sandai. Lakshmi Putrudu, the dubbed version of this film, should not have a wiki page. The discussion is located on the page titled Vambu Sandai. Thank you. --DragoMynaa
Re create
Please make Bhamatsar article available on Wikipedia. But the article was correct but the article was removed due to the creation of ban user. Just as you created Dulchasar, make a Bhamatsar article as well. 223.188.133.81 (talk) 08:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Help With Underlined Passages
Hi there, I am always trying to improve my editing skills, I added back some of the old edits to make the page flow better, but it looks like you made a comment about "independent?" is that because I don't have any other independent sources? I know we talked before about this page with lack of negative or other viewpoints, and I tried to find some but I could not. In that case would it be better to just not put any quotes in there? It is hard to edit some of the music pages because there are just not a lot of counter viewpoints out there. Thanks for your advice in advance Ricksanchez (talk) 07:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The material you re-added came from a suspected undeclared paid editor and is therefore not considered neutral or independent especially as the two sources have links to the record label, regards Atlantic306 (talk)
- Thanks, I was referring more generally. I like your approach of trying to keep articles very tone neutral. If I am working on an article where the only references say "thing X is the bees knees" but I find no balancing counter that says, "yes X is the bees but not quite the knees" how should I handle that? Although the first reference is not necessarily promoting X there is no counterbalance. Hopefully that makes sense. I would like to hear your perspective on how you handle that. Thanks again Ricksanchez (talk) 20:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, the source of the review is important; for example if it is in a publication which is a reliable source, preferably a national one, then it would be ok to quote it but it should not be claimed that an album or band was met with acclaim etc when there are only a couple of reviews. The reviews used in Underlinked Passages were from local sources that are close to the record label so have issues in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
The Magic Roundabout
Hi! Why did you remove all those reviews and accolades from the page The Magic Roundabout? LucaGaletti95 (talk) 10:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Because they were undue weight as there were already plenty of bad reviews analysed in the article to make a representative sample. Not every review should be included and adding so many bad reviews made the page non neutral and somewhat of a hatchet job, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the reply. However, in the Reception section referring to the film The Magic Roundabout there is only Rotten Tomatoes. I think the review that I inserted can be restored, as there are no reviews on the film, and those in that article are all directed towards Doogal. Furthermore, I think some reviews should also be removed from the page Titanic: The Legend Goes On for the same reasons LucaGaletti95 (talk) 18:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- As there are three positive and two negative reviews on rotten tomatoes there should be at least one positive review highlighted as well as the negative one, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
What about Titanic: The Legend Goes on? LucaGaletti95 (talk) 21:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Will look at it tomorrow, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 21:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 April 2020
- News and notes: Unbiased information from Ukraine's government?
- In the media: Coronavirus, again and again
- Discussion report: Redesigning Wikipedia, bit by bit
- Featured content: Featured content returns
- Arbitration report: Two difficult cases
- Traffic report: Disease the Rhythm of the Night
- Recent research: Trending topics across languages; auto-detecting bias
- Opinion: Trusting Everybody to Work Together
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- In focus: Multilingual Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: The Guild of Copy Editors