User talk:Bruno Rene Vargas/Archives/2021/April
American Boogeywoman moved to draftspace
[edit]See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Boogeywoman.
My suggestion is that when the film does get released, wait for sources to appear and add them. Waiting for two reviews is ideal per WP:NFO. Then you can probably move the draft back to the article namespace without problems. Alternatively, go through WP:AfC if you wish, but I think you will be fine without it. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 17:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of I Want You Back (film) for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Want You Back (film) 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.
BOVINEBOY2008 23:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
TAR
[edit]I thought we were on better footing. You can't shove a draft out of the way because you were in the process of making it yourself. I've had that happen to me countless times, I didn't go about hijacking it as a result. How exactly is that fair? I am really not interested in revisiting our conflict so soon after we agreed to bury the hatchet, I'll just reiterate my non-bitter stance of my annoyance being with the placeholder edits then leaving it be for long periods of time and that with Cocaine Bear seeing that an admin already made a decision about the situation and you kept combating it. If you had made it before my version, I would've had it deleted but the fact of the matter is you didn't, your first TAR-related edits came 26 minutes later, when you moved mine. Anyway, please let's not walk this path again. Rusted AutoParts 21:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Rusted AutoParts: Well, being honest with you is not the first time that it happens to me that I am creating an article and then when I go to publish it I find things like this, this or this. I would not care if it were not the fact that it was you who did it, but taking into account the fact that you reproach my actions but you continue to do the same thing that you criticize so much. In all the examples, including the two that you created today, the same thing happened to me, because after your claim I decided to create drafts that at least had a reference and specified that they are movies. The problem is that when I want to create them I find that you already created it in a lazy way and without even a reference, sometimes you even go to the extreme of creating redirects instead of drafts as such. Bruno Rene Vargas (talk) 21:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Like I said it happens, there's many many articles I was about to create but was beaten out. It stings that the time was for naught but you move on. I'll again state it wasn't the fact you were starting drafts with minimal info, it was the time between the creation then the content addition. There were drafts of yours that went over an hour without an added info. You've not been doing that nowadays so there's literally no beef. I don't just leave it, within ten minutes I get the draft fleshed out. I'll ask again, can we please not restart this needless bickering? Rusted AutoParts 21:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Dude what the hell are you doing? You've shoved it out again. You are literally just stealing it at this point, so I have to report to an admin. Rusted AutoParts 21:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rusted AutoParts 21:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of The Legitimate Wise Guy for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Legitimate Wise Guy 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.
BOVINEBOY2008 15:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Downton Abbey
[edit]Would just like to apologise for creating the redirect on Downton Abbey 2 — I hadn't read the Deadline article confirming it had started production when I did that, - Peterpie123rww (talk) 13:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Peterpie123rww: you don't have to apologize, you are also helping me a lot by expanding and improving the draft. Greetings. Bruno Vargas Eñe'ẽ avec moi 13:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited I Want You Back (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fox 28.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
This is the answer to your question. It's not my responsibility to "fix" your edits – it is your responsibility to properly source the content you add, especially at WP:BLPs, and especially when it concerns future WP:CRYSTAL events and developments. As you are likely pulling this info off new film articles, it should be trivially easy for you to grab a source from that article that verifies your content, and include it when you add info about future events to WP:BLPs. To emphasize it – it is actually your responsibility as Wikipedia editor to do this. So please start doing it going forward. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:51, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
- @IJBall: I told you that because coincidentally it is always you who reverses my edits. There are thousands of verifiers like you and they have never reversed me, I always ended up finding with your reversals. Apparently adding new roles in articles of actors or actresses of films that have not yet been released is something that bothers you a lot when I do not do it with a reference. Bruno Vargas Eñe'ẽ avec moi 01:06, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not true at all – every editor who adds future roles without sourcing to WP:BLPs is doing it wrong. You're not the only one I revert for this. But rather than complaining about being caught, wouldn't it be easier to just start doing it right?... To be clear, if you continue to add (future) material like this without sourcing, I will continue to revert you, as WP:BURDEN actually requires. So, if you want to avoid that? – The solution is obvious. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:10, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Moves
[edit]Just for the record, I find it incredibly ironic that you're pulling the same stuff that you were so pissed off against Starzoner doing. Primefac (talk) 16:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
The Legitimate Wise Guy moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, The Legitimate Wise Guy, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 07:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 27
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Last Will and Testament of Charles Abernathy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joe Russo.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Along for the Ride (film) for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Along for the Ride (film) 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.