| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Middle Name
editElla's middle name is [unsourced name removed - GP]. Every website says that except for Wikipedia. JohnnieMackRoney (talk) 12:34, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
- @JohnnieMackRoney: Find one of those myriad websites that state that, that also meet our reliable source standards and we can include it in the article. Until then we can't put it in. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:52, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Sourcing discussion
editWhy is it my responsibility to bring a discussion to the talk page when the person who reverted me refused to explain beyond “NYEH! The other source was better!” and threatened to report me when his reasoning wasn’t substantial enough to justify?--Simmerdon3448 (talk) 19:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- (Pinging Amaury who reverted you. –Davey2010Talk 19:43, 18 September 2019 (UTC))
- FWIW, Fanlala is WP:NOTRS. So, yes, the Seventeen source (and this should be used, not the Yahoo retread) is preferable, and should be used instead... As for the All That credit, it should be handled like it was at Riele Downs... But, Simmerdon3448, I think Amaury's real objection is you did not use an edit summary with those edits – if you use an edit summary, other editors are more likely to accept your edits, as they will understand what you are trying to do. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:22, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- It’s not like Amaury used his edit summaries any better. I asked him for an objective reason why he reverted me, and he never directly answered, and instead threatened to report me with no real basis--Simmerdon3448 (talk) 23:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Simmerdon3448: You need to stop, as you're edit warring. This isn't about "who was right". At this point, you should let somebody else make the edit. I will probably do it myself, but I'm not in any hurry – it may take me a day. But WP:NOHURRY applies here as well. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
- If it’s not about who was right, then why does Amaury get to get away with flimsy justification for his reversions but when I invoke Wikipedia policy, I get called an edit warrer? I came to the talk page, and the issue was explained and resolved. If it’s not about who’s right, why is one user being painted as the bad guy by being given talk page warnings for things he did not do?--Simmerdon3448 (talk) 02:59, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Simmerdon3448: You need to stop, as you're edit warring. This isn't about "who was right". At this point, you should let somebody else make the edit. I will probably do it myself, but I'm not in any hurry – it may take me a day. But WP:NOHURRY applies here as well. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
- It’s not like Amaury used his edit summaries any better. I asked him for an objective reason why he reverted me, and he never directly answered, and instead threatened to report me with no real basis--Simmerdon3448 (talk) 23:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Done – source replaced, and other sources added... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:41, 19 September 2019 (UTC)