User talk:KyleJoan/Archives/2020/July

This is an archive of past discussions with User:KyleJoan. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The article

The article Richard Madden you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Richard Madden 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 The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:21, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! I just wanted to message you to get your opinion on the

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chris Evans (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I saw you reverted some of my edits on Naomi Scott and left me a message on my talk page about original research. However, everything I wrote was entirely back up by reliable sources, I know pretty much nothing about her outside of the sources I read in order to expand the article as I simply saw it and believed it should be expanded and if you read through the sources you'll find all of that information in there. Because of this I was wondering whether it was a mistake, as there doesn't seem to be much reason for your message, especially seeing as you rewrote much of it yourself. Also, the events of her first live musical performance seem particularly notable as she is a musician, I'm not sure why you'd consider that non-encyclopedic, and the mentions of the eczema on the Alladin press tour and decision to not wear makeup to not reinforce beauty standards seems very much notable as not only does it directly link to her public image, but presents her views of the world. All I'm trying to say is your edits confused me as I've been edited Wikipedia a long time and I've never seen anybody take issue with edits such as these, as they're just general expansion. Issan Sumisu (talk) 07:51, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there,

R&B music was a review of one of her songs by a website that uses a WordPress layout; not only is the website questionable, the review does not constitute the genres her music encompasses as a whole. Her first live musical performance was a cover of a No Doubt song at church. How is that notable? The mention of her eczema itself is significant, but I don't believe the act of not adhering to beauty standards is suitable for inclusion, as said lack of adherence applies to everybody. What BLP has on their article "X adheres to beauty standards, therefore, their view of the world is Y"? Regarding your re-inclusion of music producer and director to the first sentence, I began an RfC on the article's talk page to obtain more responses on whether they should be included. Cheers! KyleJoan 09:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

According to

WP:SOURCE, a website just using a WordPress template is not inherently unreliable, as the author is also a factor in reliability. The author of the article, Danielle de Wolfe, cites in her author section and can be seen through her Linkedin that she has written for a number of reliable sources such as Clash, Time Out London and Dazed & Confused, meaning she can be considered reliable. Also, how could a musicians first public performance not be considered notable? It being their first public performance is in and of itself notable enough to be mentioned if reliable sources back that up as it is a major development in their career. Issan Sumisu (talk) 10:59, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@

WP:RSP, therefore, your argument that the author can be considered reliable is supported by her own claim that she is reliable and an unreliable source. Reliability aside, you believe that saying one of Scott's songs has a bucketful of soul means that she makes soul music? Sounds like a reach. You're also highlighting Scott's first public performance as something uniquely meaningful when the one source you cited (Teen Vogue) gave it a brief mention. If you'd like to open an RfC to determine whether Scott's church performance of No Doubt's "Don't Speak" is worthy of inclusion as a major development in [her] career, you're more than welcome to do so. KyleJoan 12:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I didn't mean to say that like it was a quote from the section, I used it as an example of reliability that is independent of the publisher, as having a significant catalogue of work published by reliable sources increases reliability, and I never once cited Linkedin as a source, I used it as an example to you (not a reference within the article) as to a portfolio. I definitely made a mistake with including soul, however pop was also cited which is very much stated in the article. Also, her first performance was a minor mention in the article, as it should be, anything else would

WP:UNDUE, however it is reliably cited information that is notable to her career, your argument against it seems like a massive stretch within context. Issan Sumisu (talk) 12:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Issan Sumisu: Whether reliable or not, a statement in a review of one of Scott's songs (Naomi is here to challenge your perception of the pop music you know and love) isn't enough to say she makes pop music period. That aside, I was talking about how her first performance was a minor mention in the Teen Vogue source, not on Wikipedia. The exact quote reads, Naomi had grown up listening to gospel, but it’s a mark of how laid-back her church is that No Doubt’s “Don’t Speak” was the first solo she performed there. Comparing the length of the quote to that of the entire Teen Vogue article shows that not even the source itself highlights the performance as uniquely meaningful, so tell me again how it is notable to her career. Not only that, saying it was her first performance isn't even accurate, as the source specifies it was her first solo. I also can't believe we're still discussing whether someone singing "Don't Speak" is notable. We've all done that at karaoke. KyleJoan 13:44, 25 July 2020 (UTC)