HypeBoy

 

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

PicturePerfect666 (talk) 23:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Apologies in advance if my revert at Harashta Haifa Zahra was in error, but I could not find the subject's religion in either article used to source that sentence. As you know we must be very careful with biographies of living people. ☆ Bri (talk) 13:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Bri: No, you're right, I double checked the sources and didn't find information about her religion, it's error on my part (apologies). I thought I'd put her religion in the first section because the info is mentioned in this section as well, and I forgot to move the sources, which (after another check) apparently have no information about her religion either. May I ask why you didn't also remove the info in the section I mentioned? Best, — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 17:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

A) I didn't see it. B) Before I made more changes to the article, I wanted to see your response. Now I've removed the unverifiable material at the other section, too. Cheers ☆ Bri (talk) 18:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Bri: I see. Thank you! Best, — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 19:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, In reply to your question: Kindly explain why Miss USA 2023 and similar articles use this style of short description, then. The majority of pageant articles in my experience don't follow the manual of style, are poorly written, and have little notability, and lack sources. Poorly written short descriptions are the norm, and as a result are truncated on mobile platforms. Note that comparing a practice with other pages that have the same practice WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not justification for continuing to do it against MOS. Hope that helps. Sciencefish (talk) 08:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Sciencefish: I'm afraid I have to disagree a bit because A) Miss USA articles that I mentioned do not have the problems that you listed, you can tell just by actually reading the articles (e.g. They aren't lacking in sources) and B) Per WP:SDAVOID, There is no objection to an otherwise-suitable short description that also happens to work as a definition. I changed the short description to distinguish the article further from similar articles (e.g. Miss Universe Indonesia) by emphasizing the pageant's edition. I hope this clears up the confusion. Cheers. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 00:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Are you going to do something about this troll or not? Do you need more insults and personal attacks directed towards me to prove that this guy is WP:NOTHERE? GenoV84 (talk) 22:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for your help, I appreciate it. GenoV84 (talk) 23:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

You're very welcome. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 23:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

DanCherek (talk) 01:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I saw that you accepted an unsourced addition to 1996 recently. I have reverted this change, in line with Wikipedia:DOYCITE. All new entries must include an inline citation to back up the date. Deb (talk) 15:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Deb: Noted, thank you. But may I ask why a lot of the entries there don't have an inline citation? I'm still unfamiliar with DOY lists. Best, — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 20:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Because this rule came in during 2018 and since then we've been playing catchup. So the ones that are still unreferenced tend to hang around until we have time to do something with them. If you look at the histories of these articles, you'll see a lot of reverted edits resulting from people adding unsourced content that is then removed by someone else. However, a few of the Year and Date articles are now in good shape because of editors who've done a lot of work adding references and removing entries that can't be verified. Please do feel free to join in the effort. :-) Deb (talk) 08:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Deb: Will keep that in mind! Thank you for explaining, and cheers. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 08:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I literally added a citation to the edit I made the article I made for RIIZE that you notified me about. Noahbecksleftab (talk) 16:32, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

You mean this article? This article doesn't have any mention about the "boycott" and "bullying" you wrote in your edit. All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists, and captions, must be verifiable by reliable source(s) that directly support the claim. Please familiarize yourself with WP:PROOF because it's one of the three core content policies in Wikipedia. — ‎‎‎hhypeboyh 💬 • ✏️ 23:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply