User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

A Barnstar for Little Bear

I hereby award this barnstar for such great work in Little Bear.

Thank you for contributing & helping at Little Bear (TV series). If this keeps happening, I’m wondering if we could get the page semi protected due to vandalism. I appreciate you monitoring the page! Happy New Year! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry i couldn’t get the format correct! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Apologize

An apologize for my behavior about the edits on the Peter Gadiot's page. I didn't understand the point but i do now. 2806:2F0:41A4:DA22:B5BB:3BAB:23E1:C3A2 (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I understand that MOS:CONTEXTBIO can be a bit confusing but the intent for people with multiple citizenships and nationalities, like Gadiot, is to only consider as important the one they are or have used for whatever activities made them notable. Others are part of their life history and belong in the article if sourced, but not generally as lead content. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Change Peter Gadiot's picture as per actor's request

Hello, Pls assist to make the changes as requested by the actor himself in the new Q&A session he did Jan 10, 2024. It is still active on his IS and he has been asked to ensure it stays accessible. He has noted several incorrect statements on his wiki page. How do I attach screenshot of his request for you to verify? tx Dgadj (talk) 14:21, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Dgadj: Provide a link to the instagram message itself or at least enough information that someone can find it directly. A screenshot can't be used as an official source as it would not be considered a reliable source. That needs to be in the article as a reference for at least his name. See how the other instagram source used in the article does it. The current picture may not flatter him as he likes but it is a good representation. The one on eswiki, even ignoring the likely copyvio, obscures his face. We must use images that are free-use and taken by the uploader or obtained from a source with the proper license. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Short stories on IG expire. The one currently active will expire unless he posts it as accessible. Unfortunately there is no link, but it has been verified and subject himself denies Mexican naturalization status. You are free to check.

As far as photos, he requested a more recent one. As a model and an actor, there is an abundance of professional images of him in the public domain with confirmed sources. 66.7.91.106 (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Ask him to make it not expire so we can use it as a reference or post the information somewhere else on his page so we can use it as a reference. Current link to info is https://www.instagram.com/stories/petergadiot/3277541738143232914/ but if it goes away we just have the words of unreliable sources of what it stated so future people won't be able to verify the information.

It is not easy to obtain free-use images of people. I strongly doubt that any professional photographer would release any of their work in public domain. Most of the images on the net have restricted copyrights that prevent Wiki Commons from hosting it. See C:COM:Licencing for what is required for an image to be used on Wikipedia for a living person's article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:39, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I have asked him, hopefully he gets to the request bc with a Q&A session he says he gets hundreds of Qs. 66.7.91.106 (talk) 21:03, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

He has now archived the Instagram story as part of his highlights, so editors will be able to verify it after the 24 hours Dantus21 (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Good. Link to info is now at https://www.instagram.com/stories/highlights/17852227543397579/ page 28 I updated the cite in the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

MOS-violating warrior at ANEW

Hi Geraldo Perez,

Just thought I'd let you know, I have filed a report of the 185.40.211.27 and 178.135.20.159 IP addresses over at WP:ANEW for their long-term edit-warring against MoS on multiple articles. Link to thread here if you have anything to add or to discuss if they respond. Thank you. — AP 499D25 (talk) 00:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Mass category creations and additions by Ernsanchez00 without discussion. Thank you. Amaury • 20:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Ping MPFitz1968 as well, as I know you recently nominated one of their categories for deletion. I've started a thread on this user, if either of you would like to comment. This is borderline disruptive. Amaury • 20:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	For all your hard work over at Little Bear (TV series)

Elvisisalive95 (talk) 03:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I can’t get the formatting right (Please Help!) ^_^ Elvisisalive95 (talk) 03:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Reverted my edit at Phoebe Tonkin

Hey, I was just wondering what I did wrong with my edit of Phoebe Tonkin that you reverted. You said it was unsourced, but if you look at the parts I added, they were all referenced and sourced.

Plus, I added new information as the article was outdated.

Just curious so I know what ro do next time.

Thanks, SLLS Samuelloveslennonstella (talk) 09:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Basically stating sex symbol and that she was acclaimed are unsourced and fluff. Also excessive detail for the lead. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I will keep that in mind. Thank you for your feedback. Samuelloveslennonstella (talk) 00:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Mass Category Creations by Ernsanchez00

Hello, i’ve noticed you’ve run into User:Ernsanchez00’s category additions. It was brought up on Administrator’s Incident Board a few days ago, it can be find toward the bottom of the page Here. I believe this coincides with this discussion and I don’t think it should continue to go on the way it has been. It’s creating a lot more work for users like you, whom have to go and manually revert all of these edits. It doesn’t seem constructive. I just wanted to bring this to your attention sooner rather than later. Thanks. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 16:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Elvisisalive95: It looks like the discussion got archived with no resolution. I left a message on his talk page about the issue. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I found that odd as well, sounds good. Hopefully we can get this to come to a stop. Thanks again. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 17:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, what he has been doing is being overly appologetic to the editor’s that bring these things to his attention, but then just continues on with his mass category additions.. i’m skeptical, we will have to keep an eye out! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

We need to assume good faith and give info to aid in apparent lack of knowledge. At some point, if it looks like instruction isn't working, we can look to other remedies. Still have to show that a serious effort has been made to fix things with communication before any other remedies will be considered. At this point I see good faith but WP:CIR issues. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Of course my friend. Always assume good faith, I just say that because it has still been ongoing even after that discussion. One editor in that Archive suggested him stop adding categories for the time being but that sort of fell through the cracks. I like the way you went about it on his talk page and gave him all necessary information & then we go from there. I’ll see you around! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 17:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Relationship

Moved to Talk:Joely Collins § Relationship

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Tvx1 reported by User:Amaury (Result: ). Thank you. Amaury • 23:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Joely Collins) for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Here’s to you Geraldo, Wikipedia is a better place with you apart of it. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 16:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Ultra Violet & Black Scorpion

Please see the history and talk page, specifically. Geraldo, you understand copyright stuff a lot better than I do, and I have seen you revert things as being copyright violations on Commons yourself. I am disengaging for now, but I would appreciate some input from you on the talk page since, as mentioned, you understand this stuff a lot better than I do. I also note that the IP has quite a few blocks for vandalism/disruption and, ironically, abusing multiple accounts. PS: I am glad your partial block is over. You did nothing wrong. All of it could have been avoided if the other editor followed WP:BRD, but that will be my only comment on the matter since it's mostly in the past now.. Amaury • 22:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

File description on Commons at C:File:Logo de la série "Ultra Violet & Black Scorpion" de Disney.png claimed public domain as design too simple to be copyrighted. No copyright issues using that logo in any article. I'd say it is on the edge of having sufficient creative content to copyright but the image has been on Commons since 2022 and not challenged since then. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Geraldo. Based on your explanation, I have self-reverted. Amaury • 22:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Mulan link

the link went to the middle of the article which was confusing. What should we do about it? Kelly222 (talk) 05:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

@Kelly222: The link Hua Mulan is to an overall article about the character. The Ballad of Mulan is the folk story she originally appeared in and the section in the Hua Mulan article that it links to is the description of the ballad itself, which is appropriate in the context where the link is used which talks about the ballad. Everything is working as it should. There isn't a separate article on The Ballad of Mulan so the redirect linking to a section of another article that describes the ballad is what we need to do. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Scholars debate where she first appeared in the written record. It makes more sense for the reader to start with Hua at the top of the article. Indeed the too of the article actually says it's s redirect from the Ballad. Kelly222 (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

the top not the too Kelly222 (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

In the article Mulan (2020 film) the context is the phrase "based on the Chinese folklore story Ballad of Mulan." It is talking about the basis for the film itself, not the main character. A link to an article about that story is appropriate in that location. That is where the link goes to, a section of another article, that describes the story the film is based on that is used in lieu of their not being a separate article about the ballad. If the article were talking about the historical figure, than a link to Hua Mulan would be appropriate. When you get to any article via a redirect, that message appears automatically. It is not part of the article itself. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Dan Povenmire

Why do you hate Dan Povenmire, creator of the Minions so much? 2601:402:4400:3950:29B5:1089:2A46:3A77 (talk) 14:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Why do you hate Dan Povenmire so much? He created the minions, for gods sake! Axel Carr (talk) 14:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't. He didn't. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Noisey2021

@MPFitz1968: I have reported this uncommunicative user to WP:AIAV for long-term disruption and the aforementioned no effort to discuss things. We'll see if something happens; otherwise, I may go to WP:ANI. Amaury • 18:41, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:LTA/TVFT

You know this stuff better than I do. See history of Freej and The Jimmy Timmy Power Hour, for example. Can you request a range block? This sock has changed tactics. Amaury • 15:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Amaury: Geo locates to Tunisia. I've seen this editor a lot and he is a problem. Uses a large number of ranges to do basically the same type of edits, there were at least 10 large ranges when I was actively watching this. There would need to be multiple ranges blocked to totally stop this and too much collateral damage to other editors. Not much to do other than watching, warning and reporting, but in my opinion basically pointless to try to block. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

So annoying. (Not you, of course, the IP. LOL) :( Amaury • 02:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Update: A bunch of the articles have been semi-protected, some indefinitely, following RFPP. So, hopefully that will help. Amaury • 08:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Tarzan (1999 film) § Plot rewrite. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

List of Hunter Street episodes

I may need more eyes here with a generally disruptive editor known as Lado85, at least on the Nickelodeon articles I've crossed paths with them. They appear to have a language barrier, which is fine, of course, as not everyone knows English, but it causes problems because I don't think they may be aware they are being disruptive. Or maybe they are and don't care. I don't know. See also User talk:Amaury/2022/January#Blocked for 48 hours due to edit warring, where they got me blocked temporarily after filing a report at WP:AIAV and falsely accused me of vandalism. The block reason given thankfully wasn't that, and I got the block reversed. But I don't feel like going down that rabbit hole again with them, because knowing them, they may try to falsely accuse me again of vandalism or whatever. On the article itself, the WP:STATUSQUO is that directors and writers are not listed in the episode tables and instead in the infobox of the main article. The reason being that this series in particular, for some reason, has especially multiple writers per episode and listing them all in the tables makes them look ugly. Just because the information is there doesn't mean it has to be in the article or in the article the traditional way, similar to how just because something passes WP:VERIFY, it doesn't mean it merits inclusion. WP:DUE and WP:UNDUE must also be considered. Ping MPFitz1968 as well. Amaury • 09:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

There are writers and directors in all shows lists Why is this problem for you here? And why only directors and writers added by me? Season 3 has this information for long time. Your comment- "I said there are too many directors and writers for *this* series, making the episode tables look ugly. You can take this up on the talk page. Stop being disruptive, as per WP:BRD. " Not me you are disruptive And your action is simply vandalism. Ugly is air date cells, stretched on half of page. Too many writers are only in season 1. Why do you delete season 2 and 4, and keep season 3? In season 4 are only one director and writer per episode. In season 3, 2-3 writers per episode. Your actions and words are contradictory to each other. I wrote to talk page, but you keep ignoring. Lado85 (talk) 09:17, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

They got you blocked that time because you vandalized a page. You continued to delete information about season 4, that was aired in all around the world, because it wasn't (and still isn't) aired in USA. And you said there is no season 4 till it will be aired in USA. Lado85 (talk) Lado85 (talk) 09:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Do not cross-post what you've posted there here. Keep the discussion to one place. The only one being disruptive here is you. Whoever added directors and writers shouldn't have, and that's been corrected. But I am not discussing this here with you. I will post on the talk page when I am good and ready, not because you are ordering me to within minutes of you starting a topic. And I suggest you quit contribution stalking me and falsely accusing me. There was no such vandalism on my part. Maybe try reading the actual reason given for the block, which I got reversed, in any case. Amaury • 09:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I cross-posted this here, because you are ignoring me there. Lado85 (talk) 09:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

You posted the discussion at 2:00 AM, then came crying here at 2:17 AM because I was apparently ignoring it. I responded there to another user at 2:38 AM. That's only a span of 38 minutes. Wikipedia isn't an instant messaging app like Discord. Replies aren't always going to be instant, and some people here sometimes don't even have the chance to respond to something until a day or so later because people have lives and are busy. And even on an instant messaging app, people are sometimes busy and can't respond right away. And, of course, as I predicted, you went running to WP:AIAV to falsely accuse me of vandalism again because you aren't getting your way. You may want to read up on WP:VANDAL and learn what a vandal actually is. If you can't, then you shouldn't be editing here. I also suggest you self-revert your latest edit to the episode list, as you are clearly edit warring now. Amaury • 09:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I see this is being discussed on the article talk page so expect consensus resolution to happen with discussion. I personally don't like writers and directors to be in the series infobox unless there are a very few and those few are responsible for all the episodes. Normal practice is list them in the episode list for the episodes they are responsible for. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Geraldo, just to clarify, my reason for posting here was for assistance with Lado85's edit warring on the article of reinserting content that did not have consensus at the time, not on the discussion itself. I will defer to you on the infobox and the episode table, but if you take a look at the episode table currently, you'll see what I mean by "ugly" due to how many writers this series has, especially for the first season. However, at least for me, the point is moot as I no longer have any interest in watching the article and will be abandoning the discussion. Amaury • 04:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Lion King II: Simba's Pride § Changes to the plot and lead. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:30, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

(Re:your reply on Talk:Dan Schneider...) ...and that persistent anon - Thx for your reply - I couldn't figure out what to reply to the post. Shearonink (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Alexa Nikolas and Talk:Alexa Nikolas

I previously inquired to you about this at User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 32#Alexa Nikolas. I am also going to ping MPFitz1968 again, as something strange is going on here. Specifically, the last two discussions (15 and 16) on the talk page, as of writing this. I don't know how to handle this, as I previously thought the other user was possibly trolling—still unsure on that—but now a different user has shown up appearing to take the stance opposite the other user, and I don't know if their statement in the last discussion (16) borders on WP:LEGAL, with them claiming the other user is possibly a stalker. Could you please have a look? Thank you. Amaury • 20:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Hard to say. It looks like a legal threat against a Wiki editor. A report to WP:ANI may be appropriate here and let others who can enforce sanctions and are more aware of the legal issues look at it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Possible WP:LEGALTHREAT on Talk:Alexa Nikolas, if you'd like to comment. Amaury • 20:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of The Powerpuff Girls (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Powerpuff Girls (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Powerpuff Girls (disambiguation) 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 until the discussion has finished.

kpgamingz (rant me) 16:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

New message from Amaury

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 29 § Category:Jessie (2011 TV series). If you're interested, since you participated in the previous discussion on this matter. This category was recreated last week, despite nothing changing, which is what led to the previous deletion. I didn't have a chance to get to it until now since I've been busy. Amaury • 22:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Expatriate categories

Hello! Despite your statement in in this edit summary that expatriate related categories are restricted to present tense only, this does not seem the case in practice. No matter the size, expatriate-related categories include former expatriates. See similar categories such as Category:American expatriates in France and Category:Mongolian expatriates in Japan listing some deceased people.

If past tense people and situations (e.g. article subjects who returned to their home country, moved elsewhere, or died, or regime change led to a nation's collapse) could not be included, every subcategory under Category:Expatriates in the Soviet Union would have been emptied and deleted under WP:C1 because the Soviet Union has split into several countries. As yet another counterexample to your point, note that diplomat-related categories such as Category:Ambassadors of Qatar to Canada eventually can be traced back to Category:Expatriates in Canada and Category:Qatari expatriates, but after a diplomat's tenure has ended, the category is not removed from the article about them. There are also sport-specific expatriate categories, like Category:Expatriate men's footballers in Albania, but some in that category have moved onto other leagues in other countries, meaning that not everyone listed in that category are currently in Albania, although the category correctly remains on their page. Vycl1994 (talk) 19:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

@Vycl1994: If anything those categories should be cleaned up. Some due to WP:CATVER issues, others due to WP:NOTDEFINING. In the case of Huang he lived in Thailand for four years as a young child due to his parents choice - not his, did nothing notable there, and it had no stated impact on his future notable activities. I would support the expat categories for a bio article only if a person's life in a that country was somehow related to his notability, not just a passing part of their childhood or irrelevant to anything they did. Generally that means where they currently reside as an expat or, if for the past, they lived a significant and notable part of their life as an expat there. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Herman and Katnip

Hi, I see that you've reverted somebody several times who's trying to add both "Animated characters introduced in 1944" and "Animated characters introduced in 1950" to Herman and Katnip. The reason why they're doing that is because Herman was introduced in 1944, and Katnip was introduced in 1950. Just a heads up for what's going on there. :) Toughpigs (talk) 04:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

IP: 1.145.35.251

Hello Geraldo, To let you know the Australian IP who is constantly changing "special effects" is now operating from IP:1.145.35.251, having been blocked from 101.180.97.95 and previously operating from 1.145.121.196. I have reported the latest round of changes to the Admins, but have not the time to change all the edit-warring back to the original consensus versions. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Reverted edit in Inside Out 2

Hi Geraldo, I noticed that you reverted my edit on Inside Out 2 with an edit summary saying "unsorced". However, I did not add any new information to the article and instead just changed some grammar. I know that the issue I was trying to solve has since been fixed, but I guess I just want to ask you why you did that? I have no idea how Twinkle works but did you just see that I added 2 bytes of data to the article and since I didn't add a source, reverted it? Sorry if I sound too accusatory. I have a lot of respect for your anti-vandalism work. Cheers. GoldRomean (talk) 02:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@GoldRomean: The unsourced content I was referring to in my edit summary was made by a string of edits by an IP before your edit. It looks like you fixed a grammar error made by the IP edits so it got undone as it was tied to what the IP did. I did try to revert the IP edits only but your changes prevented that as it modified what the IP changed. My edit summary was related to the string of edits I reverted, not yours directly. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I understand now. Thanks for clearing things up. GoldRomean (talk) 12:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Bettany-Rhys-Jones connection

Regardless of how Paul Bettany and Duchess Sophie are connected, why don’t you think it might be worth mentioning that her godfather’s son is a world famous actor? It’s sourced and doesn’t take up much room. AzXpOmU (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

And I hope this doesn’t spiral into an argument. I’m just curious. AzXpOmU (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

@AzXpOmU: I commented on Bettany's talk page. Basically it just mentions something their grandparents did and that connection is so far removed to the point of being irrelevant to their lives. It is not a relationship of any practical sort. If that connection led to something notable it might be worth mentioning, but so far is has nothing to do with either of them and impacts neither of their lives in any way. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. AzXpOmU (talk) 04:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Monsters, Inc. § Banish or Exile. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

There's also an ongoing discussion over at Talk:Toy Story 3#Plot discussion as well. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Infobox

Why do you keep deleting attributes added to an infobox on TV shows? Is [1] fine to do? Green Eggs and Ham (TV series) has valuable information about the many animation companies used to create it, and it was there earlier today until you started removing additional info on the infoxobes. VGPCVGCP (talk) 00:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

@VGPCVGCP: Request attribute additions to the standard television infobox at Template talk:Infobox television. "Animation services" was discussed and rejected for inclusion. Using basically a side channel of infobox construction tools to add an attribute that is not in the standard set for a defined infobox should not be done as it goes against the agreed-upon standard attribute set. Addition of the info to the article is fine as long as it is sourced, it just doesn't belong in the infobox. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

How do you source it when you can easily find the info in the credits? VGPCVGCP (talk) 22:56, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

@VGPCVGCP: A released TV show or episode is a primary reliable source for everything it contains including the credits. Generally we don't need to add another source for anything already listed in the credits, just for info labeled "uncredited" and anything beyond the bare credit data. Any interpretation beyond what is in the primary source needs a reference though. For a production section mention it would be good to have a bit more than just the credit info about the animation houses so it isn't just a repeat of the credits, something that gives a reason this info is important and interesting and for that will likely need a reliable secondary source. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:27, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Big City Greens

I may require more eyes here. I no longer maintain this article by any means, but it is on my watchlist and normally only touch it to revert vandalism or general disruptive edits, with exceptions like today. Also my talk page due to a personal attack, a serious accusation of block evasion with absolutely zero proof to back up the claim, which I do not appreciate it. Amaury • 20:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pinocchio (1940 film) § Plot. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Marino13

What would this be reported under or given a warning [2]. Also seems to be using another user in the summary as well. I reverted some of her edits on the Thundermans as it wasn't broke [3], [4] and seems to be going under cover with ip's reverting edits on the Alexa Nikolas page [5] as well having issues editing now and in the past. Including attacking a former user [6]. All edits have been reverted, but not really sure what warning to give or bring this issue to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Thanks Magical Golden Whip (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

@Magical Golden Whip: That recent edit at The Thundermans looks like a subtle personal attack on you at the very least (referring to the June 15 edit in particular), and this should be reported to ANI if they continue with this kind of behavior of disrupting articles just to inject personal attacks or the like in edit summaries. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I've looked at the diff from their user page as well. Definitely a sneaky type of personal attack with those wikilinks. Worth a warning, and if they continue, ANI. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I found the warning for personal attacks and gave then a one time warning as the next time I will take up with ANI. Magical Golden Whip (talk) 18:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

@Magical Golden Whip: Based on that edit summary, as well as others, this also seems to be WP:HARRASMENT at this point, and possibly WP:STALKING, with the intention of causing trouble. Some of their edits are along the lines of, "How long until MGW reverts this?" To me, that seems like some sort of personal vendetta against you, that they're butthurt, for lack of a better phrase, over being reverted that they're possibly now just making problematic edits to feel special or for attention. This initially started when they reverted an edit on Alexa Nikolas by our colleague IJBall, who unfortunately no longer contributes here, from well over a year ago. It seems odd to me that someone would go through the trouble of remembering something for that long and, for whatever reason, decide to revert well over a year later. It's long overdue at this point, but now that they've received another warning, if they make one more problematic, I recommend going ahead and filing a report at either WP:ANEW or WP:ANI, as they've also been slow-motion edit warring. However, since it's more than just that, ANI would probably be the better option, where the edit warring can also be mentioned. Amaury • 19:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I have previously reported Marino13 at WP:ANI and administrators did not see it as personal attacks. It was the opposite as they started defending him saying things like "you cannot be mad at a 13-year-old kid" and similar. – sbaio 04:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Like i said before: "only trying to help out guys, sheesh" And making me look like a joke in the process. FYI SBaio, I don't appreciate the snooping! Marino13 (talk) 03:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

No Time to Spy: A Loud House Movie

The link in the heading above is actually a redirect to this film's article, which has the word "to" capitalized, and it shouldn't be per MOS:TITLECAPS. This has been brought up on the article's talk page, but since the titles with the word "to" both capitalized and uncapitalized are used, a simple move to correct the problem isn't possible. I will ping Amaury about this as well. (I remember IJBall being one who was good at doing this "swap", but I don't think I have privileges to perform it myself.)

This was brought to my attention with this edit in List of Nickelodeon original films. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I tagged the redirect for G6 delete to make way for a move to that location. Simple caps error fix shouldn't be controversial. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @MPFitz1968: I can make the swap for you if you want. — YoungForever^(talk) 16:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

@YoungForever: That would be convenient and fix the issue the fastest over waiting for a page delete. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

@YoungForever: Sounds good. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done — YoungForever^(talk) 16:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Ren & Stimpy Show § Creators. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

RFP: The Lego Movie (franchise)

Hey, I've noticed that you've been reverting a lot of disruptive editing from a similar IP users on The Lego Movie (franchise), and I was wondering if you were considering a request for protection on it for persistent disruptive editing. Just reaching out, have a good one! BarntToust (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbender season 2

More eyes will be needed here. One user wants to include Clancy Brown with the rest of the main actors/characters on the basis that they're a "secondary main character." There's no such thing. Someone is either main or not. Clancy Brown could be listed as recurring, though. I left both editors warnings for edit warring, and they were later both blocked temporarily by Acroterion on Tuesday. The editor who wants to include Clancy Brown tried to reinstate their edit again just a little while ago, and I was in the process of reverting it and directing them to the talk page when I was edit conflicted by the other editor.

Please see the edit history of the page for more context, and I will also ping MPFitz1968. Amaury • 16:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Beauty and the Beast (1991 film)

Appreciate the explanation. Every day's a school day! Quentin X (talk) 19:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Emily Alyn Lind (birthday is May 6, 2002)

Her smashing interviews interview she gave in 2011 at 9 she said she was born May 6. But I found a J-14 article that has her birthday as May 6, 2002:J-14:

XOXOMeet ‘Gossip Girl’ Star Emily Alyn Lind — The Actress Is Making a Major Name for Herself

Dec 1, 2022 10:58 am

By Shelby Stivale. It mentions her birthday:She’s a New York NativeThe actress was born on May 6, 2002, in Brooklyn, New York.:https://www.j-14.com/posts/gossip-girl-reboot-star-emily-alyn-lind-everything-to-know/ can it be sourced?

Tnays20 (talk) 00:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Emily Alyn Lind

Her birthday is mentioned as May 6, 2002 on IMBD, Rotten Tomatoes and Town and Country Music are those reliable articles Tnays20 (talk) 21:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tnays20: Check WP:RSNP for most of them and also good reading in general. WP:IMDB is specifically not a reliable source for pretty much anything. Rotten Tomatoes is fine for ratings info but not for bio info. Nothing specific about Town and Country Music but I'd be suspicious as they likely got their info from IMDb. Glamour source in the article is the best we have found so far and gives a good approximations. Also see WP:BLPPRIVACY - some people don't want their exact birthdate known and don't make it generally known, this may be the case for Lind, Approximate is fine if sourced. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I spoke to another user Laterthanyouthink (talk) he said “After raising another discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard, opinion still seems to be split about using RT as a source, but some editors seem to think it's okay to use it as a source for birth info. Tnays20 (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

The summary statement at WP:ROTTEN TOMATOES is "There is consensus that Rotten Tomatoes should not be used for biographical information, cast and crew data, or other film and television data, as it is sourced from user-generated and user-provided content with a lack of oversight and verification." Some editors may think it is OK to use but most don't. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Can I use Fandango as a source her birthday is listed as May 6, 2002 on Fandango,Fame10,Horror wiki, Famous Birthdays, Astrotheme, TV Tropes, TV insider Tnays20 (talk) 22:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Too many sources get their info from IMDb including most of those you list that I recognize. Someone writes an article, checks Wikipedia and IMDb for basic research and includes that in their article. Best way to check is to look at [[WP::RSNP]] or do a search on the archives at WP:RSN. Real major news sources with a reputation of fact checking or personal social media pages where the subject gives out the info herself is what we are looking for. Again see WP:BLPPRIVACY. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I found an article from Emily was 9 and she tells a reporter her birthday is May 6 titled:=Emily Alyn Lind Interview: Busy Young Actress Stars in ABC's 'Revenge'

Written by Melissa Parker can I use it as a source Tnays20 (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I found an article from when Emily was 9 by Smashing interviews Magazine and she tells a reporter her birthday is May 6 titled:=Emily Alyn Lind Interview: Busy Young Actress Stars in ABC's 'Revenge'

Written by Melissa Parker can I use it as a source Tnays20 (talk) 22:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Melissa Parker (Smashing Interviews Magazine): When is your birthday?

Emily Alyn Lind: May 6. Tnays20 (talk) 22:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

smashinginterviews interviews/actors/emily-alyn-lind-interview-busy-young-actress-stars-in-abcs-revenge is blacklisted for use on Wikipedia so can't be used. I can't even put the full url of the interview in this reply. This means a reference to that site would be rejected by wiki software when you tried to save the page. Otherwise it would have been OK since she herself stated her birth day and month, and stated age at date of publication give year. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I got a reply from Laterthanyouthink (talk)and he said:IMDB is not a reliable source, but I remember an earlier talk page discussion about RT bios where the editors concerned agreed that it was acceptable for DOB. I have added some notes and other sources on the talk page of the article, so you can use those sources and/or discuss it further there. Tnays20 (talk) 23:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

If the editors agreed that RT bios were acceptable for birth info and I gave you a article where Emily states out her own mouth her birthday is May 6 then I don’t see why you won’t update her Wikipedia page. Tnays20 (talk) 23:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Source you gave that backs it up is blacklisted so can't be used. Other editors are mistaken and are ignoring the RfC about the issue. Info of this sort must be sourced in the article. Article currently is sourced for the info it has. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok I found another article by J-14:

XOXOMeet ‘Gossip Girl’ Star Emily Alyn Lind — The Actress Is Making a Major Name for Herself

Dec 1, 2022 10:58 am

By Shelby Stivale. It mentions her birthday:She’s a New York NativeThe actress was born on May 6, 2002, in Brooklyn, New York.:https://www.j-14.com/posts/gossip-girl-reboot-star-emily-alyn-lind-everything-to-know/ can it be sourced? Tnays20 (talk) 00:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That article is just repeating stuff from other sources and then just throws out her birthdate with no context about where the author got it from, likely IMDb. The Tribute.ca source mentioned in the talk page is likely useable as it is a bio blurb in a reputable source, not a gossip magazine. Suggest continuing this discussion about search for sources on that page. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Video where Emily mentions she was 9 from October 9, 2011 that supports she was born 2002: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xlln85_natalie-alyn-lind-vip-premiere-night-3rd-annual-los-angeles-haunted-hayride-interview_shortfilms Tnays20 (talk) 01:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That just duplicates the Glamour source that is currently in the article. Gave how old she was at a certain date. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay I what about this People magazine article about her mom’s divorce that says her age is 22: One Tree Hill’s Barbara Alyn Woods and Husband John Lind Divorce After More Than 20 Years of Marriage:https://people.com/one-tree-hill-barbara-alyn-woods-and-husband-john-lind-divorce-8654355 Tnays20 (talk) 01:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

That duplicates the existing reference in the article. We know her age at a given date. What is unsourced is the day and month. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Dale Whibley

Will ping MPFitz1968 as well. I will note that the references appear to be good, except for #8. I'm not sure if that's a reliable source or not, but overall, it's a pretty small article. Does this meet WP:NACTOR and/or WP:BASIC? Amaury • 08:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

It is marginal but would probably be retained if taken to AfD. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Kelly Rowland

Geraldo,

A super fan of Kelly is adding unnecessary puffery to her page in the name of "stating facts". The username is Emeritoella. Please revert this person's edits. And maybe block or warn them about taking such action. I've already attempted undoing their edits and they came back and undid mine. I don't want to edit war and perhaps they will take an established user like yourself more serious.

Thanks.

12.75.127.28 (talk) 22:07, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Update. I have reverted the user's edits manually myself. He or she may come back though. If they do you can take care of it then. I left edit summaries to support my actions. Perhaps I am wrong in my thinking. And if I am, please tell me. 12.75.127.28 (talk) 07:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it is taken care of. I agree, looks like a publicist wrote that stuff, didn't look encyclopedic in tone or content. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Chingiz Allazov

Geraldo, bro, tapology is an incorrect source they always mess up nationalities, in fights chingiz allazov always dons his Azerbaijani nationality. On his official VK fan page he views himself as Azerbaijani in nationality, tapology is useless for nationalities and even looking at the record of fights. Look at all of his official fights and you will clearly see that Chingiz Allazov represents Azerbaijan, as well as Belarus, despite not being Belarussian. 82.44.247.44 (talk) 14:23, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Article content supports Belarus. Moved there as child, based there. Assertion that source is unrelable noted but other article content support it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Toy Story (franchise)

I won’t add the co-directors to the Toy Story franchise again only because you’ll only remove them again. I only recommend that you stop being so uptight and entitled. Jeffrey2768 (talk) 22:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi, I noticed some seemingly dubious uses of rollback in your recent contributions. I see that you had similar issues last year (User talk:Geraldo Perez/Archive 32#Your use of rollback). I see no good reason to use rollback with e.g. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. These are all from today, and while some were perhaps not necessary changes or improvements, none seemed to be vandalism and multiple were correct additions of information. You didn't give an explanation or warning for any of these as far as I can see. Can you please either explain these or else be a lot more careful with rollback use? Fram (talk) 08:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I am checking edits from problematic IPs mostly. The range 12.190.236.0/24 is used by just blocked for block evasion Special:Contributions/12.190.236.16 and other edits in that range follow the pattern. I have given talk page warnings to the blocked IP on other accounts he uses such as redundant categories being added see User talk:74.75.112.118. Generally I am less inclined to give edit summaries on reverts of changes a problematic IP made that didn't give an edit summary particularly when I have interacted with them before for similar edits. General issues are redundant categories I have already warned the editor about and unsourced content being added such as editor invented alternative names. Geraldo Perez (talk) 08:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Without a notice, a block, a warning, ... there is no way for anyone to tell why you reverted these, and no indication that these are problematic IPs or not. Something like this is "editor invented alternative names", the same title is used further in the article. It was probably a mistake by the editor (the Pingu Show seems to be a programming block around Pingu), but nothing that warrants rollback. Same for this. Here you rollback an actual improvement, reinserting the wrong date (the source for the correct date was already in the article[15]). In general, I have the impression that you have become somewhat trigger-happy with rollback, perhaps due to having to deal with some longtime pests. But for people noticing your changes on their watchlists, there are too many unexplained and at first sight unexplainable rollbacks between the correct ones. Fram (talk) 09:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

The birth date "fix" conflicted with the birthdate as reported by the mother in her social media post which I did check before reverting. The re-order of nationalities put the primary one second and was done without giving a reason. The other editor has a history of making up alt names - what goes in the article is supposed to be official ones with sourcing. My reading of WP:ROLLBACKUSE #5 is that the user being reverted needs to be informed of what is happening and why, which I generally do for a series of problematic edits I revert. Informing other reviewers of why each revert happens sort of undermines the usefulness of rollback for quickly fixing problems. Some of the issues is with dynamic IPs particularly in /64 ranges. I check the range for problematic edit patterns and the actual IP talk page of the info warning message may not match later edits. I do try to keep to the guidelines and use rollback appropriately. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

New message from Amaury

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 20 § Category:The Thundermans. Amaury • 08:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I read through the discussion referred to at WP:SMALLCAT, which they said no longer applies, and it is confusing enough that I feel that I no longer understand the categorization rules enough to contribute to a deletion discussion. ArbCom got involved, it seems, so basically SMALLCAT got thrown out with no replacement that seems to apply. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Geraldo. But that's interesting. So, basically, people can just make categories or templates at will now and they are okay? Like, someone could make a category with two members or even just one member and it will remain up? Obviously, if said category was made as a personal attack, that would be a difference story. For example, if a sockpuppet made Category:Stupid Idiots (just as an example name for a personal attack) containing me, you, and various other users, that would obviously be deleted. Anything else, though... If SMALLCAT no longer applies, why does it still exist as a page? That's my question, and it may be a rhetorical question, too, because like you, I'm also confused. Amaury • 17:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

They kept it as a historic archive and tagged it as deprecated with a link to the discussion in the tag (which I read and tried to understand). Just can't use SMALLCAT anymore as a reason and basically they kept the page as a way to communicate don't use this anymore. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Susan Wojcicki

Hey, I wanted to address your latest revert of Susan Wojcickis page. Apparently I still do not understand how categories work. She used to own polish citizenship which is written in the article. Therefore, I would expect that you could include all of those categories only based on her citizenship document and no matter if she did her business in Poland or not. Being polish means being polish in my understanding. What am I missing? Thank you in advance!--FPSalman (talk) 18:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@FPSalman: Her Polish citizenship is somewhat irrelevant to anything she has done in her life, it is an inheritance from her father, and as far as the article indicates she has never lived there or done anything notable in Poland. She was born in the US and all her notable activities were as an American as noted in the intro and in the article. As for categorization, categories should reflect what is in the article. The only significant mention of Poland in the article is with respect to her relatives and her Polish citizenship from those relations. The link to Poland needs to be a lot stronger than just having citizenship for those categories to be WP:DEFINING, actually doing her notable activities as a Pole in Poland would be needed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

"The Wonderful Wizard of Quads" and "Danger & Thunder"

This is related to The Thundermans category deletion discussion mentioned here. I didn't notice it at the time, but this BrookTheHummingbird editor, who a lot of times tends to make and has a history of making disruptive edits, also made redirects just to simply pad the category they created, even though redirects should not be categorized. They are not articles. From my understanding, the only acceptable categories to add to a redirect page would be the ones you've added to pages like List of K.C. Undercover characters, such as Template:R to section and Template:R with possibilities. However, even there, they're not being done as categories, but rather as templates so that categories aren't listed at the bottom of the page.

Anyway, to my point, I know you're not planning on contributing to the deletion discussion due to the recently made changes, such as SMALLCAT no longer being a guideline/policy and deletion criteria being more complicated, and that's fine, but since these episodes are never going to receive standalone articles, what reasoning should be chosen for a CSD? Same for The Haunted Thundermans (The Haunted Hathaways episode), though that one was created by a different editor back in 2014. I don't see any point in these pages existing, especially ones for episodes, if they're never going to be used since it is very rare, going by guidelines and policy, that a particular episode of a series is going to be notable enough, with lots and lots of coverage by secondary sources, to have its own article, even though some editors try to dance around it. Whether or not a season is notable enough to have its own article is already complicated enough, and many of the season articles, such as those for The Middle, only do the absolute minimum needed, as you've pointed out before when we were having a discussion with other editors on whether or not The Thundermans should get standalone season articles.

In short, what CSD reasoning should be given for these redirects? Amaury • 22:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Amaury: I had to think on this a bit, sorry for not responding sooner. The redirects are fine as far as I am concerned and I generally like episode redirects as they avoid pipes with anchor names in them when an episode name is linked. They could probably be tagged with "R with possibilities" even if it is unlikely they would ever be made into an actual article, they are candidates for that. I added those tags to the redirects you mentioned. Categories need to meet WP:CATVER which a redirect won't as it has no article content. If a category is directly supported by what is at the target, that might meet CATVER indirectly, though. Categories related to the redirect itself should be OK. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pokémon Heroes § Recent changes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Remove "Columbia Pictures" on all Wikipedia articles of Sony Pictures Animation films per article content and credits

Per article content and credits, you will remove link "Columbia Pictures" on all Wikipedia articles of Sony Pictures Animation films because the film was credited as presents named "Columbia Pictures", and also you will remove the category. All Sony Pictures Animation films were distributed by Sony Pictures Releasing under the "Columbia Pictures" banner. Will Geraldo Perez do remove link "Columbia Pictures" and remove the category on January 1, 2025? 2001:448A:6000:1EEC:ECD3:D022:5AA8:D699 (talk) 08:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Lind sisters

can u pls stop changing the Lind sisters profiles, put the actual dates they were born not "1999 or 2000" cuz that's stupid... thank u Taylor Ravenscroft (talk) 14:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

All bio info must be sourced specifically birth info - see WP:BLPPRIVACY Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

stop changing my edits pls Taylor Ravenscroft (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Date ranges

Hi Geraldo Perez and pinging Amaury,
Weren't there an editor or several editors repeatedly adding commas on date ranges few years ago like this? — YoungForever^(talk) 23:50, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@YoungForever: Yeah, the commas are incorrect in this case. IJBall would likely be able to answer this question better than me, but sadly, he's no longer active on Wikipedia. In any case, since they are date ranges, commas should not used. The following are all equivalent and correct:

The series aired October 11, 2022–March 7, 2023

The series aired from October 11, 2022 to March 7, 2023

The series aired from October 11, 2022 until March 7, 2023

Your browser's grammar/spelling checker will underline it blue (not red, which is used for misspellings), unless you've chosen to add an exception, but without the comma is correct, because, for example, you would not write The series aired October 11, 2022,–March 7, 2023. So, the short version is that date ranges do not get commas, and it doesn't matter if the date range is displayed with an en-dash or with "to" or "until" between the two dates. The other workaround would be to just rephrase the sentence to avoid to the date range altogether in cases where people cannot just drop it. For now, that doesn't appear to the case for the article you mentioned, but the user you mentioned should be following WP:BRD. Amaury • 08:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Amaury: Thank you for your explanation. — YoungForever^(talk) 14:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Goyard

Remarkably poor reverts by you here! I hope these aren't typical. Where do you think Marie-Caroline de Bourbon-Sicile, duchesse de Berry goes to? Also a breach of WP:ENVAR. Don't edit-war over this. Johnbod (talk) 16:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

@Johnbod: I obviously know where the link goes and I also verified what the reference stated. Info in articles should match references per WP:V. The original info in the article, reflected the source and also gives context to why this is important. Her substantive title in France is much more relevant than her maiden name in Italy to a French company. Also WP:IMPLICITCONSENSUS applies, there is no reason to change the display name from the long term form used in the article since at least 2015. Also note that the IP changing the info has a history of going this sort of thing, making mistakes, and usually to the detriment of the articles changed. A detriment to this article as well. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:53, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

On the contrary, we should normally use the en:wp article title in links, not the form used in a foreign language source. Johnbod (talk) 17:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

My objection was to the display name in the piped link which was not an accurate English translation to anything in the source. Removing the display name from the link and leaving just the link name is fine as it is a fairly close English translation of the original French. The target article was moved 6 years ago and the link wasn't updated then as the redirect continued to work. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

The source (let's face it, a crappy PR effort) identifies the person, on whom we have a long article. There's no need to worry about the source after that. She was of course a princess, and plenty of better RS call her so. There's plenty of other iffy translation in the article, btw. Johnbod (talk) 03:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

The title of the linked article itself doesn't use the honorific, it is not part of the WP:COMMONNAME. The source gives the history of the company and it is a good reference for that purpose. No reason to add unnecessary honorifics, it has never been in the company's article and is pointless fluff. The link name sufficiently identifies the person. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Monster High (TV series)

I could have sworn you've commented on this before somewhere, but maybe I'm misremembering. At least I couldn't find anything. Anyway, see the history of the page, and this was also an issue back on August 9. See also the talk page. I am pretty sure our MOS overrides things like that, and then when there are cases like that, a note can be added to mention it, while still following the MOS on what is seen by people. I could be wrong, though. Amaury • 20:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I commented on the article talk page. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Kris Kristofferson § Lyme Disease - revisited. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Descendants films (and other musical films in general)

I just reverted edits in the first three Descendants films' articles where the editor added in the plot sections the titles of songs in parentheses, placing them where an element in the plot leads to the song's appearance in the film. [16][17][18] This I think is excessive and unencyclopedic, and only serves a particular audience of readers; those not familiar with the franchise and having not watched any of the films will have no idea or context for these song titles being referenced in the plot. If I remember right, this has been done before on this set of articles. And I see this has been done in the articles for Disney Channel's two Teen Beach films and the first two High School Musical films as well.

Looking at some classic musical films (e.g., The Sound of Music, Grease, and Saturday Night Fever), this kind of practice is not done at all in their plots. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. The song titles add nothing of value to the basic plot description. In a musical a song is part of the story and what is in a song is more important. In general parentheticals of any sort detract from ease of reading for understanding so should be rarely used. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: This has been a semi-ongoing issue from IPs over the years. Why they feel it's necessary I have no idea. Amaury • 18:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: Separate comment to successfully ping due to typo in previous comment. Amaury • 18:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

New message from Sjones23

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie § Skye's fate. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Page move

There is an article that has been submitted for creation review, but it anyone able to approve it. Everything looks good from what I can tell, but just to need to be moved for it to go live. The page is Draft:Barney's World. Magical Golden Whip (talk) 20:24, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks good to me. AfC review is still pending I noticed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Is anyone able to move it or does it have to be someone from AfC review? Sorry that is what I meant to ask Magical Golden Whip (talk) 20:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

It is best that an AfC reviewer does it as their stamp of approval is important, already rejected once but a lot of work done to improve it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Lupita Nyong'o

Hello. When "Mexican Actor" appears in a short description for example it's the person's nationality not their ethnicity. Spectritus (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Also, it's common for a person's nationality to appear in their short description. Spectritus (talk) 15:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

See discussion on article talk page. Also see MOS:CONTEXTBIO for what goes in intro and lead of articles, note the examples there as well. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't aware of the debate. Spectritus (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Jay Clayton (attorney)

Geraldo Perez, Hi. Nice to meet you. I noticed you are a pending change reviewer, and I would appreciate your help with a request I have posted on the Talk page for Jay Clayton (attorney). My COI with Mr. Clayton, as an employee, prevents me from modifying the article myself. I have taken the input of other editors into account and changed my suggested/requested wording and the supporting sources. I can implement directly if you approve of the content. Thank you for your time and review. Looking forward to working with you to incorporate this content in this BLP, Blackseneca (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I am not familiar enough with the article to make a judgment on content. I note User:Drmies in the talk page discussion and he can approve changes to content. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Maia Reficco

Hi there! About Maia Reficco's page, I was wondering if you could protect it? In the sense that it keeps getting edited even when her nationality is already discussed in the Talk page and I don't wanna start an "edit war" since I know it shouldn't be done. LMOBX (talk) 23:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

You can request page protection at WP:RPP. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:27, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Olivia Rodrigo

I'm bringing up this, as someone made a request on the talk page about changing the lead sentence from "American singer-songwriter and actress" to "Filipino-American singer-songwriter and actress". Someone else made the change per the request, but I immediately reverted before I could complete my reply to the request. I made it clear about MOS:CONTEXTBIO in both my revert and my talk page reply, but I have a feeling some edit war may get going here, so will need more eyes. The article was recently renewed for semi-protection, for about another year.

The one making the request was saying something about people denying that she is Filipino, but I certainly don't agree with that. MPFitz1968 (talk) 07:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Watching. Ethnicity is explicitly excluded for mention in the lead. Your comments on the talk page were correct. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Reverting my edit on Zendaya

So I see you have reverted my edit on Zendaya. Why? The word I capitalised is capitalised in the film title, so why should it not be capitalised in the article? RedactedHumanoid (talk) 21:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

See MOS:CT for how titles are captitalized - "from" is one of the words that isn't per explicit example in that article as "Prepositions containing four letters or fewer". I am aware that the film article has decided to ignore the MOS after an RfC, but that exception applies only to that specific article and does not change the general rule for any other article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:46, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Also see discussion at Talk:Zendaya/Archive 2 § Spider-Man Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Geraldo, I believe they may be referring to the film's poster, not the article. Either way, MOS:CT overrides that, as you mentioned. Having said that, at some point down the road, I may try to WP:BOLDLY move the article to the correct casing for "from." Amaury • 22:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Copyvio

Could you explain how you figured that out [19]? I believe you wholeheartedly, I just want to know if there's any specific signs I should be on the lookout for. It's too bad it was a copyvio, I looked on Commons to see if we had a more recent photo than 2011. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Log in to your Commons account and look at image at C:File:Dan_Schneider_2021.png Under the "more" tab at the top is a link to Google Lens which allows image search. Might have to examine a bunch to find the actual sources but I found that one in a NYT article on Schneider. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't realize that was an option under "more". It's always good to learn new things. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I also discovered that this has to be enabled through your preferences, but I'm still glad to find out it exists. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:34, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I forgot about that part. I enabled it a fair time ago and didn't remember I had to enable it in preferences. Good tool to have - I use it a lot. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Dog with a Blog et al

I may need more/closer eyes here and elsewhere. There's been an IP using different IP addresses "fixing" date ranges and adding the incorrect comma to this and other articles. I remember the date comma thing being a sockpuppet thing, I just don't remember who it is. Recently, a named user also tried to insert it on Dog with a Blog. Now, I cannot conclusively say it's the same person as the IP, but it's still adding the same incorrect thing. Will ping MPFitz1968 as well. I don't understand why people refuse to understand this. January 1, 2023,–January 1, 2024 would be incorrect, which means January 1, 2024, to January 1, 2024 is also incorrect. It's still a date range, just written out instead of en-dashed. January 1, 2023–January 1, 2024 and January 1, 2023 to January 1, 2024 are equivalent. Amaury • 08:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect. MOS:TENSE: ... between October 6, 1997, and May 20, 2002. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 09:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Tense has nothing do with dates. But the fact that you ended up here means you are clearly stalking my edits. I suggest you knock off the disruption. You need to discuss the actual matter at the article talk page, not here, and gain a WP:CONSENSUS before changing it, per WP:ONUS and WP:STATUSQUO, but that's all I will say in response to your ridiculous argument here, especially since you're stalking my edits, which disqualifies you, anyway. I will not be responding to you further here. Use the article talk page. Amaury • 09:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

It is MOS greentext, which means it is an explicit example of correct usage. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 09:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

So two MOS examples to satisfy ONUS. I haven't seen any stated policy granting some "range exception" for DATECOMMA. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 09:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Jeanette McCurdy

@MPFitz1968: I will likely need more eyes here. Amaury • 21:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)