User talk:Lordeswork

I am interested in the intersections of literature, culture, and politics.

Hello, Am prince, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Julietdeltalima (talk) 17:31, 21 December 2017 (UTC) Getting started Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Help directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Welcome! Some helpful hints...

Thanks for adding content to Wikipedia! I saw it because Cat Marnell is on my watchlist. I wanted to let you know that your additions didn't meet Wikipedia's guidelines—which is okay; it's part of the learning process for new editors, and there aren't a lot of experienced editors working on fashion articles in particular, so it is not always easy to get an idea from reading other articles what is and isn't acceptable.

These were specific issues that now you'll be aware of:

• WP:RS: Anything you add to an article, especially articles regarding living people, must be verifiable through a reliable source.
• WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL: Wikipedia doesn't predict the future, so the notion that Marnell's second book "is expected at 2018" isn't appropriate. When there is a firm release date that can be verified through a reliable source, that may be appropriate to add (although some editors would disagree with me and say that until the book is actually released, there's no reason or justification to mention it in the encyclopedia).
• MOS:SURNAME: Wikipedia isn't a gossip or pop-culture magazine and it's never okay to talk about article subjects by their first names. Cory Kennedy is always "Kennedy," never "Cory" (the only exception would be in the context of a sentence about, let's say, her sister or another family member with the same surname; "Kennedy appeared with her twin sister Chris at the State of the Union address. Cory sat next to Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Chris sat next to Sen. Barbara Boxer.").

I think that the content about Kennedy gaining a contract as a "spokesperson" (which is a terrible word, but it's certainly better than "the face of," which is marketing jargon that has no place in an encyclopedia) is possibly significant enough to mention, as long as there's a WP:RS.

Anyway, thanks again, and please don't be discouraged—this process gets easier as you become more familiar with Wikipedia's core guidelines and Manual of Style. You should always feel free to ask questions at WP:TEAHOUSE as well. Take care! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 17:44, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

May 2023

Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Philip Seymour Hoffman, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I appreciate your concerns here, but in the end you removed info that had been sourced and replaced it with, I'm guessing, your own wording that lacked sources to support it. DonIago (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, the previous comment also also did not have a source, so I am a bit confused. It was commentary on the following sentence, which was a sourced. It seemed to call him fat and ugly and I just wanted to shift the language to being less offensive, and a bit more neutral. I do not believe every single sentence needs a source, especially when it is clustered in well sourced sections in which everything else is full supported. I would actually suggest it be removed altogether. Are you some sort of admin? Or self-imposed mod? I do not really understand the tone of this message... Lordeswork (talk) 14:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Basically: Please explain why your edit removed sources within the article? Was it because you couldn't see what they were supposed to be sources for, or was there another reason? At a glance you removed them and the text they proceeded because you didn't like the wording, but rewording the statement is one thing; removing the sources is a different matter. DonIago (talk) 15:39, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

i must have removed the source by accident, that was not intentional. i was only trying to make the language more neutral, less offensive. i saw it as a minor edit, and it had nothing to do with the source. my apologies. Lordeswork (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

No problem; thanks for clarifying! I think someone else has made changes to the article in the meantime; hopefully you find those agreeable. If not, discussing the matter at the article's Talk page is probably the best option. Happy editing! DonIago (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)