User talk:AffeL: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:51, 9 June 2017

A Barnstar for you

		The Writer's Barnstar
		For your excellent work creating character articles for A Song of Ice and Fire. Keep up the great work! IdenticalHetero (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Game of Thrones

The article Game of Thrones you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Game of Thrones for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 23:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Peter Dinklage

The article Peter Dinklage you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Peter Dinklage for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of RL0919 -- RL0919 (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

True Detective

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 04:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yay.. thanks for the review and all. - AffeL (talk) 11:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of True Detective

The article True Detective you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:True Detective for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Snow

Hi, I made a few edits on Kit Harington's page. I saw you nominated it for GA. Great job! I hope to see it pass. Let me know if you have any questions. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. - AffeL (talk) 14:07, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kit Harington

Here's my thought process. This is either a) Kit Harington, not wanting to publicise his relationship with Rose Leslie on Wikipedia, b) the reverse, c) a vandal screwing about. WP:AGF says we can't choose option c) if a) and b) are within the bounds of plausibility. If the IP comes back again, drop me a line and I'll have a look - if they're not prepared to communicate with us though, we can't do anything. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Both Kit and Rose have been public about their relationship(See:^[1](Min: 4.24) and ^[2]) If the ip user comes back, I will inform you. - AffeL (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What if they've just had an almighty row and split up? Not that I would wish that to happen particularly, but sometimes that's just the way life goes. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They where seen togheter just a day ago at an event in England, as a couple, holding hands and kissing. So, I don't believe they have parted ways, Even if they hade, a source is needed to confirm it. - AffeL (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And they said romance was dead :-) ... okay, I'm leaning more towards option c) now. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

:-D AffeL (talk) 13:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, in my warped imagination I have thought of d) a 27-year old bespectacled geek with suspicious facial hair who can't stand that that beastly Mr Harington had the gall to date the delectable Ms Leslie and decides to blank all mention on the internet to make him feel better. However, in practical terms that is close enough to c) anyway, and also d) is more likely not to be an anon IP, but an admin on Commons. (ooooh) Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hahah...Yeah, I would not be surprised if that was the case. - AffeL (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: The suspicious facial hair guy is back. - AffeL (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Banhammered. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333:. That guy is back, using another ip adress. Wow, he really can't stand Harington and Leslie being a couple. - AffeL (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Right, protected it for a week. That should keep things at bay. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

@Ritchie333: The sentence in question, as it currently appears, is clear WP:SYNTH. I don't know what edits you were referring to, and I am not the IP in question (nor Harington, nor Leslie), but I know the content you are talking about and I am not a vandal. Either (a) a new source that explicitly supports the claim needs to be added, (b) the claim needs to be removed, or (c) the claim should be rewritten to accurately reflect the content of the BuzzFeed article (that the "on-and-off relationship" was widely rumoured and it wasn't until 2016 that the two "officially" appeared together at an event as a "couple"). Note that I think (c) might be a BLP-violation and violate WP:SPECULATION, and (a) might not be viable as I don't follow celeb gossip "news" and so don't know if such a source exists. One doesn't need to be a vandal or a COI editor to reach this conclusion -- any editor who understands our policies would reach the same conclusion. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:57, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar for you

		The Special Barnstar
		This Special Barnstar is for all the hard work you have done on List of awards and nominations received by Game of Thrones during the last few months. Kingstoken (talk) 23:56, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Death Grips discography FLC

Hi AffeL, I saw the kerfuffle at FLC over unactionable opposes etc, would you now, in the cold light of day, be prepared to strike your oppose at the above? It would be a good gesture and would encourage me to review your list in good faith. What do you reckon? Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 07:33, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. - AffeL (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. Review soon! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Kit Harington

The article Kit Harington you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Kit Harington for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Numerounovedant -- Numerounovedant (talk) 11:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0YbPrLdyeg

[2] ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA1t6o1IsrQ

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 73: / Line 73: @@
 == Your [[WP:Good articles|GA]] nomination of [[Kit Harington]]==
 The article [[Kit Harington]] you nominated as a [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article]] has failed [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]]; see [[Talk:Kit Harington]] for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. <!-- Template:GANotice result=fail --> <small>Message delivered by [[User:Legobot|Legobot]], on behalf of [[User:Numerounovedant|Numerounovedant]]</small> -- [[User:Numerounovedant|Numerounovedant]] ([[User talk:Numerounovedant|talk]]) 11:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
-== Seriously, could you be a bit more careful with your sources? ==
-It took you [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Dinklage&type=revision&diff=784645322&oldid=784643903 twelve minutes] to locate three sources that all failed verification, format the refs and add them. You really should just look for one source that verifies the material in the article rather than piling on a bunch of sources that don't, as it creates a lot more work for the rest of us. [[User:Hijiri88|Hijiri 88]] (<small>[[User talk:Hijiri88|聖]][[Special:Contributions/Hijiri88|やや]]</small>) 11:31, 9 June 2017 (UTC)