User talk:Moncayk1
Moncayk1, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Hi Moncayk1! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC) |
MonsterVision Edits[edit]
Hi there. The Wikipedia page on external links says they should not normally be placed in the body of an article. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links) Also, I'm not sure why you are capitalizing Shudder, as, to my knowledge, streaming platforms are never capitalized here. (See pages for Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, etc. for examples.) Is there a loophole or stated policy regarding either of these that I'm overlooking? Please let me know. If it can't be resolved, we should call in a moderator for help. Regards. 108.185.40.27 (talk) 10:13, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi! I understand the use of not normally as we prefer you to use wikipedia pages whenever possible, but if the individual in question doesn't have one, I think that's a case that warrants a link to point out who they are. Also, in the pages you showed me the streaming services are capitalized so not sure what you mean? I'd prefer not to bother the moderators so hopefully we can get this sorted out, thank you!
- Ah, I'm sorry. I meant italicized, not capitalized. My bad. Streaming platforms shouldn't be italicized. As for the linking, it seems Wikipedia's policies are somewhat fuzzy, which is why I was hoping a moderator could help clarify that one. One other thing I forgot to mention is that film titles are always italicized. Even in a table, I believe.108.185.40.27 (talk) 09:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
- Okay that makes sense, if other pages aren't doing it than "Shudder" shouldn't be italicized. I just thought it looked good, but that seems like a very clear rule. At the end of the day though, in terms of that one non-wikipedia link in the body, the point of this award is to highlight these horror fan sites, which I believe isn't done properly without any sort of link to them. I did notice the lack of italicization of some films in the body though, which is more so my mistake than me doing anything purposeful. Yet, in terms of the tables, if you think they should be italicized, I have no issue with that.
- Yeah, I'd say definitely italicize the film titles in the table. I know it's tedious to do, though, so I can do it, if you want.108.185.40.27 (talk) 09:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Not a problem, I want the page to look professional, so I'll do whatever takes. I italicized all the movies in the tables, and then I went back and made sure all the "Shudder"s were italicized and other little edits for consistency. Thank you!
External links[edit]
Hello, I'm Melcous. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the main body of an article. Generally, any relevant external links should be listed in an "External links" section at the end of the article and meet the external links guidelines. Links within the body of an article should be internal Wikilinks. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 06:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to reach out, personally I would have rather kept some of those external links, as they are important to telling the story of this show, but if you think it's best to remove them I can live with that. That being said, when I was including much of this information on the MonsterVision page I spoke with people and the amount of information seemed appropriate, so if you could please leave that argument be and settle for the victory on external links I would really appreciate it. Sure, I am a fan of the show, yet the information is far less than many other show pages. If you were genuinely interested in learning about this show you would need all the information present, cutting anything would make it so you can't fully understand the show. If you wanted to discuss headers to make the information seem less that sounds promising. Additionally, there are not many sources that can be trusted for this show outside the main providers.
- Lastly, I had just added the information from today's episode and now have to add that again, please check when restoring stuff.
- Thanks for your reply. The issue is not about what you think seems appropriate but about wikipedia's core policies and guidelines. The whole premise of this encyclopaedia is to summarise what reliable, independent sources say about a topic. If such sources cannot be found, it quite possibly means the content is not notable. It's great that you are a fan of the show, but this project is about building an encyclopedia - there are plenty of other fan sites available where people can go if they want to "fully understand" the show. You might find it helpful to read through what wikipedia is not, which is a policy for all editors here. Thanks Melcous (talk) 08:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- In terms of sources, I don't think you're recognizing the value of this primary sources. Then in terms of the amount of content, again I'm not seeing how this is a lot as other shows have way more information that I could argue isn't warranted. In the nicest way possible, you're making me wish that I kept this information on the MonsterVision page where I spoke with an admin about the information and we came to an agreement that it was fine. If you do insist on the amount of content being too much, I'd love to know what you would cut. The tables are official episode descriptions, there is information about specials and seasons that is needed for a basic understanding of the show, and then there is other information that is crucial to the show. For example, part of the actual experience of the show is contests. If Game of Thrones had contests, they would be listed on that page. Then, as someone who was a history major in college, sources from Shudder would be valued.
- Again, it's not about me recognising sources or not, it's about understanding how wikipedia works and what the core policies are, which includes the importance of secondary sources. In terms of excessive content, I have made an initial cut of trivia like days of the week, times, "peacock" adjectives like "legendary" etc. There is still plenty more that could be done. Finally, can you please learn to sign your posts on talk pages. Thank you Melcous (talk) 08:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ultimately, I disagree with a lot of the changes you've made, and if I'm being honest kind of ruined my day. Nevertheless, the drive-in totals are the most important to me, so I can live with the changes you've made just to not argue further. I am curious though if you are satisfied with the amount cut, or would you want me cut more myself? Additionally, I can swap out some of the Shudder links for other links, not sure how much you think is best though? Thank you Moncayk1 08:34, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- Again, it's not about me recognising sources or not, it's about understanding how wikipedia works and what the core policies are, which includes the importance of secondary sources. In terms of excessive content, I have made an initial cut of trivia like days of the week, times, "peacock" adjectives like "legendary" etc. There is still plenty more that could be done. Finally, can you please learn to sign your posts on talk pages. Thank you Melcous (talk) 08:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- In terms of sources, I don't think you're recognizing the value of this primary sources. Then in terms of the amount of content, again I'm not seeing how this is a lot as other shows have way more information that I could argue isn't warranted. In the nicest way possible, you're making me wish that I kept this information on the MonsterVision page where I spoke with an admin about the information and we came to an agreement that it was fine. If you do insist on the amount of content being too much, I'd love to know what you would cut. The tables are official episode descriptions, there is information about specials and seasons that is needed for a basic understanding of the show, and then there is other information that is crucial to the show. For example, part of the actual experience of the show is contests. If Game of Thrones had contests, they would be listed on that page. Then, as someone who was a history major in college, sources from Shudder would be valued.
- Thanks for your reply. The issue is not about what you think seems appropriate but about wikipedia's core policies and guidelines. The whole premise of this encyclopaedia is to summarise what reliable, independent sources say about a topic. If such sources cannot be found, it quite possibly means the content is not notable. It's great that you are a fan of the show, but this project is about building an encyclopedia - there are plenty of other fan sites available where people can go if they want to "fully understand" the show. You might find it helpful to read through what wikipedia is not, which is a policy for all editors here. Thanks Melcous (talk) 08:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 25[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Last Drive-in with Joe Bob Briggs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shudder. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
July 2023[edit]
When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to List of The Adventures of Pete & Pete episodes, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube or Sci-Hub, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:
- If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
- If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
- If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;
If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. — Diannaa (talk) 20:09, 23 July 2023 (UTC)