Talk:Miami Psychic: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 11:25, 11 February 2024

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Paranormal Low‑importance

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Links in "See also" section

Numerous wikilinks seem to have been copy-and-pasted to the "See also" sections of various pages despite not having any particular relevance. I have removed several links from the "See also" section that did not have any direct relevance to the article subject's author other than to implicitly disparage her, which would be a violation of the WP:BLP policy against unsourced content. WP:SEEALSO says that "The links in the 'See also' section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number." – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 03:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wallyfromdilbert: You are going way overboard on the medium articles you are removing material. The MOS states: "One purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics..." I maintain that the bios of other mediums and articles covering the general topic are, for certain, tangentially related. RobP (talk) 03:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BLP violations should not be restored. Regarding wikilinks to other mediums, under your interpretation, any biography could have dozens of "see also" entries based purely on their profession. Can you explain how that would make sense as a guideline? – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 04:02, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{American English}}
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
+{{WikiProject Books|needs-infobox=}}
+{{WikiProject Paranormal|importance=low}}
+{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=low}}
+}}
 {{annual readership}}
-{{WPBooks|class=stub|needs-infobox=}}
+== Links in "See also" section ==
-{{WikiProject Paranormal}}
-{{WikiProject Skepticism}}
+Numerous wikilinks seem to have been copy-and-pasted to the "See also" sections of various pages despite not having any particular relevance. I have removed several links from the "See also" section that did not have any direct relevance to the article subject's author other than to implicitly disparage her, which would be a violation of the [[WP:BLP]] policy against unsourced content. [[WP:SEEALSO]] says that "The links in the 'See also' section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number." – [[User:Wallyfromdilbert|wallyfromdilbert]] ([[User talk:Wallyfromdilbert|talk]]) 03:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
+:@Wallyfromdilbert: You are going way overboard on the medium articles you are removing material. The MOS states: "One purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics..." I maintain that the bios of other mediums and articles covering the general topic are, for certain, tangentially related. [[User:Rp2006|RobP]] ([[User talk:Rp2006|talk]]) 03:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
+::BLP violations should not be restored. Regarding wikilinks to other mediums, under your interpretation, any biography could have dozens of "see also" entries based purely on their profession. Can you explain how that would make sense as a guideline? – [[User:Wallyfromdilbert|wallyfromdilbert]] ([[User talk:Wallyfromdilbert|talk]]) 04:02, 27 December 2019 (UTC)