Talk:Jenica Atwin
Latest comment: 1 year ago by 99.106.93.88 in topic IP's preferred addition
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jenica Atwin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
| 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 C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Crossing the floor edit
I've reverted the information about her crossinng the floor for now. While it seems likely to occur based on the sources, it has not (as of this post) yet officially happened. Ckatztalk 17:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
The official announcement may be occuring shortly as CBC's site appears to be standing by on a live feed with Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc. Ckatztalk 17:08, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Wolastoq edit
This article mentions "Ron Tremblay, the Wolastoq Grand Chief". The redirect of the link to Wolastoq or a possible alternative term has recently been discussed on Talk:Wolastoq#Article_name. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 20:25, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
IP's preferred addition edit
I invite IP 99.106.93.88 to discuss their preferred addition here and gain consensus by persuading other editors rather than continuing to edit war. Thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 00:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
It is not a preferred addition. Half of a quote was cut off due to the reference used cutting it in half. I added the full quote but forgot to add the reference for it, several particularly slow people reverted it, I realized my mistake and added the reference. It is not language, it is accuracy. 99.106.93.88 (talk) 00:53, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- By
several particularly slow people
are you referring to ClueBot, Paul Erik, Glane23 and me? And you think that name calling is going to be an effective way to persuade us that you were right all along (that is, those three of us who are not an anti-vandalism bot)? Since you may not yet be aware, I will inform you that WP:CIVILITY is required of those who wish to edit Wikipedia. It is not optional. Generalrelative (talk) 00:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC) - I see that you are also at 4 reverts in the past 24 hours, in clear violation of WP:3RR. Please pay careful attention to our policy forbidding edit warring in the future. You may find it helpful to read WP:1AM as well. Generalrelative (talk) 01:01, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- I see no need to persuade (edit: Also, persuade you about what? I am adding the second half of a quote that was cut off due to a poor reference used, what exactly do you need to be persuaded on?) you that I was right all along, the reference I added does that for me. As for civility, you removed my completion of the quote with zero comment on the reversion. You reverted it AFTER I explained what the change was. Again with zero comment. Would you care to explain this? 99.106.93.88 (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- You will at the very least need to persuade me or someone else here that your preferred addition is WP:DUE. I am not convinced that it does not represent WP:SENSATION. It certainly looks to be, even judging simply on the basis of its use of multiple exclamation points, which do not typically appear in encyclopedia articles. But in terms of content too, I am dubious that this remark would be seen by the community to satisfy WP:10YEARTEST. Generalrelative (talk) 01:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- They were part of the full quote, but if you want to remove the extra exclamation points feel free. The quote should still be included. 99.106.93.88 (talk) 23:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- You will at the very least need to persuade me or someone else here that your preferred addition is WP:DUE. I am not convinced that it does not represent WP:SENSATION. It certainly looks to be, even judging simply on the basis of its use of multiple exclamation points, which do not typically appear in encyclopedia articles. But in terms of content too, I am dubious that this remark would be seen by the community to satisfy WP:10YEARTEST. Generalrelative (talk) 01:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- I see no need to persuade (edit: Also, persuade you about what? I am adding the second half of a quote that was cut off due to a poor reference used, what exactly do you need to be persuaded on?) you that I was right all along, the reference I added does that for me. As for civility, you removed my completion of the quote with zero comment on the reversion. You reverted it AFTER I explained what the change was. Again with zero comment. Would you care to explain this? 99.106.93.88 (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)