User talk:Goodnightmush: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Hammersoft (talk | contribs) →Reagan (2024 film): new section |
→Reagan (2024 film): reply |
||
| Line 186: | Line 186: | ||
It's a secondary source that yes, refers to rotten tomatoes, but discusses the reception of audiences being radically different than the critics. That's the point of the source, and that's why it matters in this context and is allowable. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 15:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
It's a secondary source that yes, refers to rotten tomatoes, but discusses the reception of audiences being radically different than the critics. That's the point of the source, and that's why it matters in this context and is allowable. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 15:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
||
:{{re|Hammersoft}} Thanks for reaching out, rather than just reverting. My view is that since the cited MSN article is just pointing to RT as its evidence for the reception of audiences having a different view than critics (and we don't use RT to assess audience reception), we can't rely on it. If MSN had any other evidence for a positive audience reception, I'd agree with you. But it seems like they just have RT and a press release from the producer of the movie claiming a positive audience reception, which is definitely not a reliable source. If there's a real, rigorous poll showing a positive audience reception (CinemaScore or something like that), I'd be persuaded. <span style="font-family:Garamond;">[[User:Goodnightmush|<b style="color: Black">Goodnight</b><span style="color: silver">mush</span>]][[User talk:Goodnightmush|<sup style="color:blue">Talk</sup>]]</span> 15:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:38, 6 September 2024
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||
|
| ||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Administrators' newsletter – July 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).
Administrator changes
Technical news
- Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)
Miscellaneous
- The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more
Administrators' newsletter – August 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).
Technical news
- Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
- Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ
Evasion
Hi, how are you? These IP address appears to be Xiaomichel evading the block, same style of changes: [1] and [2]. JacktheBrown (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also these two users: Rusoscal and Pumconi who vandalized the page Capuchino[3] of the Spanish Wikipedia are obvious sockpuppets of Sapsby/Xiaomichel (they wrote practically the exact same things that Sapsby wrote here on the English Wikipedia; as you can clearly see by looking at their only contributions:[4][5] ). And he also vandalized the page Café expreso[6] through many IPs; eliminating its Italian origin and trying to transform it into something French... [7] 82.55.77.241 (talk) 16:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- @JacktheBrown: Looks like things are quiet so far with the relevant pages protected, but feel free to post anything new to the SPI. There's nothing I can do about the Spanish wiki, though. ÍGoodnightmushTalk 17:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your answer.
Potential sock (I'm not completely sure): [8]. JacktheBrown (talk) 19:31, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your answer.
- @JacktheBrown: Looks like things are quiet so far with the relevant pages protected, but feel free to post anything new to the SPI. There's nothing I can do about the Spanish wiki, though. ÍGoodnightmushTalk 17:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
List of Wars involving Tunisia
To create a Wikipedia page on wars involving Tunisia, one can structure it similarly to the provided well built pages such as Egypt or the Kingdom of Morocco's military history. The page shall be divided into sections based on historical periods, such as the Hafsid dynasty, Ottoman Tunisia, the Beylik of Tunis, and modern Tunisia. Each section should list significant conflicts, their combatants, outcomes, and relevant treaties or events.
I litteraly don't understand why you did not even read my version.
Please tell exactly what the current one is accurate.
Best regards 37.169.32.11 (talk) 16:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, I protected List of wars involving Tunisia because the page has been edited by one or more users using multiple accounts to edit the page in violation of Wikipedia policy. I apologize if you are unconnected to those accounts and have been trying to make constructive edits. If so, you are still welcome to discuss them and request that they be made on the article's talk page. You could also make an account which will, after make enough constructive contributions elsewhere, be allowed to edit the page. GoodnightmushTalk 17:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation and for your vigilance in maintaining Wikipedia's standards. I understand the need to protect the integrity of the page, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss any potential edits on the article's talk page. I'll certainly consider creating an account to contribute more effectively. In the meantime, I'll share any suggestions I have through the talk page to help ensure the accuracy and completeness of the content. Thanks again for your understanding and for your work on Wikipedia.
- Still I worked a lot on the page I have edited. Because the one you restore is very incomplete and SHALL be improved.
- Best regard 37.169.32.11 (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Then I will republish it. Please read it and compare, you will see 1) the amount of work, 2) the completness of the page. Oilyvertwist (talk) 19:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi, could you please change the protection of the cappuccino page and add it to the other two? See recent page histories for information. Thank you very much in advance.
I was alerted by this IP address: [9]. JacktheBrown (talk) 15:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- Both IPs involved at flourless chocolate cake have been blocked. Marron glacé has been quiet for over a week. Cappuccino has quieted down for now and I'm hoping full protection will not become necessary. We'll also wait for various WP:SPIs to resolve. GoodnightmushTalk 13:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- I believe that Xiaomichel, unfortunately, will continue to create new socks forever. The problem must be solved at the root. JacktheBrown (talk) 13:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also, I'll just quickly suggest that, although it's totally fine to edit your own talk page messages for a short while after you post them, if you are making changes later (e.g., the next day like here), you are encouraged to add them as separate comments or otherwise make clear that they are later changes (per WP:TALK#REVISE). And you are strongly discouraged from making edits if anyone has replied to you (not that that happened here, but just mentioning it). GoodnightmushTalk 14:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which
applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past
. - A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.
Arbitration
- Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
- Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
- The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.
Miscellaneous
- Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
Reagan (2024 film)
It's a secondary source that yes, refers to rotten tomatoes, but discusses the reception of audiences being radically different than the critics. That's the point of the source, and that's why it matters in this context and is allowable. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Hammersoft: Thanks for reaching out, rather than just reverting. My view is that since the cited MSN article is just pointing to RT as its evidence for the reception of audiences having a different view than critics (and we don't use RT to assess audience reception), we can't rely on it. If MSN had any other evidence for a positive audience reception, I'd agree with you. But it seems like they just have RT and a press release from the producer of the movie claiming a positive audience reception, which is definitely not a reliable source. If there's a real, rigorous poll showing a positive audience reception (CinemaScore or something like that), I'd be persuaded. GoodnightmushTalk 15:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)