Talk:Jadyn Wong

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jadyn Wong's day of birth removed[edit]

TBH, I disagree with having her birthday removed and saying that sites like facebook and twitter "ARE NOT GOOD RELIABLe SOURCES"--73.166.187.154 (talk) 17:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 11: https://www.facebook.com/ScorpionCBS/posts/828641983879225

What kind of fact-checking has been carried out by the Scorpion web person? We don't know because they did not cite a source, or even name the reporter. That whole birthday congratulations post could be in error. What is needed is a WP:SECONDARY source or an official statement from Wong. Binksternet (talk) 03:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is NOT an error, I'm sorry but whenever it's from Twitter or Facebook, especially from the television network that airs the show many of their info is accurate, seems like you are very unflexible with those changes.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 15:36, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The date on which a "happy birthday" post was made to social media is not sufficient sourcing in and of itself — there is no guarantee, for example, that the post was made on her birthday rather than, say, the day before her birthday for some reason. For another example, we once got tripped up on the correct birthdate of Canadian politician Adrian Dix — the first source for his birthday was the date of a "Happy birthday to Adrian Dix" party advertised on his political party's website, but it turned out that the event wasn't actually happening on his birthday, but on a venue-available date a few days after his actual birthday. So, unfortunately, we need something better than "the producers posted a happy birthday wish to Jadyn Wong to their Facebook page on May 11" as proof, in and of itself, that her birthday is on May 11, as opposed to "it's on May 10 and the post got delayed for some reason", or "it's on May 12 and just got posted a day early for some reason".
And if you have to rely on an archived version of her profile on the show's own webpage as proof because the information has been removed from the current version of the same page, then you need to keep in mind that "it was wrong" might very well be the reason why it was removed from the current version — and, in addition, that source entirely failed to support 1985 as her year of birth. So that simply wasn't good enough either.
So for the moment, unfortunately, none of the sources that have been provided are good enough in and of themselves. Birthdate information is certainly content that we like to include in Wikipedia articles whenever possible, but it's not mandatory information that we must include so critically that it's worth edit-warring over bad sources. It's better to not include a birthdate at all, until we can find a better source for it than has been shown by anybody so far, than it is to rely on sources that people are battling over. Bearcat (talk) 18:49, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No Offense, but the site did say her day of birth is May 11, and you are clearly so reluctant to accept the facts--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 02:23, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about me being reluctant to "accept the facts" — the source in question simply is not good enough. And again, the month and day of a person's birth is only relevant or useful to mention in a Wikipedia article if the year of their birth is also included, and has no value as a piece of standalone information without the year attached to it. Bearcat (talk) 18:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
An archived source is not less reliable. The website people could have removed the birthday from the current version for any number of reasons. Binksternet (talk) 05:16, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If a source exists in two distinct forms, one archived and one current, which differ in their inclusion of the exact detail that you're trying to source to the archived version, then the archived source is not usable for that purpose. Not because it's archived, but because there's a discrepancy between the two versions. And a disputed source does not stay in the article pending evidence that would disqualify it — it stays out of the article pending evidence that would permit it. So the onus here is on you to prove that the information was correct, not on anybody else to prove that it was wrong. And anyway, you still haven't actually answered the question of what encyclopedic value it could possibly have to give the month and day of her birth date without also specifying the year. Bearcat (talk) 18:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jadyn Wong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jadyn Wong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jadyn_Wong&oldid=1206072285"