Butlerblog

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2021/May; 2021/June; 2021/July; 2021/November; 2021/December; 2022/January; 2022/February; 2022/March; 2022/June; 2022/July; 2022/August; 2022/September; 2022/October; 2022/November; 2022/December; 2023/January; 2023/February; 2023/March; 2023/April; 2023/May; 2023/June; 2023/July; 2023/August; 2023/September; 2023/October; 2023/November; 2023/December; 2024/January; 2024/February; 2024/March; 2024/April; 2024/May; 2024/June; 2024/July; 2024/August; 2024/September; 2024/October;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Learn more about this page

User page Talk Library Articles Essays Userboxes Edit summaries

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following:

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed.
Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply.

I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

Bot run

Latest comment: 8 days ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, can you run your bot again on the various TV date categories? Gonnym (talk) 14:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Gonnym: Yes - I need to do some updating to the bot and get back to running it daily as I was before. ButlerBlog (talk) 18:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ah, even better. Let me know if there is anything on my side you need. Thanks! Gonnym (talk) 20:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

When your run your bot, can you run it also on List of The Graham Norton Show episodes so it fixes those dates? Thanks! Gonnym (talk) 16:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please provide more information on why you canceled all edits

Latest comment: 9 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The Doug Wilson entry was effectively written by him though posted by a third party, and effectively leaves out everything for which he is actually known. My edits were meant to add at least some of this information to make the entry objective, mostly with direct quotes from Mr. Wilson himself from his own writing and online videos. To say "some of this may be OK, but there was too much wrong to go piece by piece" is not that helpful in working to adjust the edits. Could you share just a few pieces of what's wrong so that they can be adjusted perhaps? Otherwise a fluff piece on a HIGHLY controversial and polarizing figure will be what remains on Wikipedia. TruthTellerMoscow (talk) 04:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

@TruthTellerMoscow:The problems with your edit:

The lead should be a summary of what is in the article. You're adding information to the lead that is not covered in the article. See WP:LEADDD (or for more detail: WP:LEAD)
Some of what you added is original research and is cited by a primary source. See WP:NOR (If you're reading something by Wilson and interpreting it and using a primary source to cite that, that is original research. You need to be summarizing what is found in secondary sources.)
You have added information that is not cited, which is also considered original research.
Some of your sources are blogs, which we do not generally use as sources. See WP:SELFPUBLISH
You have serious BLP violations which attribute uncited direct quotes from the subject. Not only must these be cited, that cite must be from a reliable source, not someone's blog. See WP:RS
You have copied verbatim from other articles without proper attribution (although you did indicate the article you copied from in your edit summary, you didn't fully note this properly) WP:COPYWITHIN
Some of the material copied is more specific to the church and not necessarily to Wilson. It's already covered there. And, you have to be careful with the wording, especially in a WP:BLP article.
External links should not be placed in the body of an article. See WP:EL. Also consider WP:ELBLP

You did this all within a single edit. In review, there's really nothing useable in your edit.

Some other things that are problematic:

You stated here that "The Doug Wilson entry was effectively written by him though posted by a third party" - Where is your evidence for that? Regardless, your edits are problematic and whether the article was started by Wilson or not has nothing to do with the problems within your edits. We're only addressing that problem.
Your username indicates that you are very likely not a neutral party either, which is just as problematic as if there were COI edits from Doug Wilson (which you haven't actually provided any evidence of).

ButlerBlog (talk) 12:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

~~Since there are serious BLP violations in this edit [1], I am reverting back to status quo ante.~~Someone else has already reverted this based on the BLP problems within your edits. The WP:ONUS is on you to support your suggested inclusions, which you need to do on the article's talk page and get consensus before including them. IF they were to be included, they need very serious editing AND actual reliable sources, not self-published blogs. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)Reply