User talk:Adamstom.97

Case of piped link

I agree, there was no reason for me to change the case of that piped link. My bad. But why did you change it, before and after me? Dicklyon (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. I saw you change the capital letters to lowercase but that wasn't needed for the first one, so I restored that one. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

My first edit was needed to fix the punctuation and to fix the linkage so it wouldn't appear on the report Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations. The fact that I went a little further than necessary in lowercasing didn't create any problem, so why did you jump in to fix it? My second edit was because I didn't look carefully at what you did; I should have just left it, for which I'm sorry. But then you again jumped in to fix what wasn't in any way broken. Dicklyon (talk) 21:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, I agree that the case there doesn't matter. So I'm wondering why you're changing it while criticizing me for changing it. Just seems like an odd thing to do. Dicklyon (talk) 21:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand why you think it is a problem to fix the formatting. I know my changes had no impact on how the link works, that's not why I did it. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

No, it's not a problem, just wondering why you did it. Your reverts suggested that you thought I had left it in a non-ideal state. What do you mean now by "fix the formatting"? Dicklyon (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

There is no need for the first letter of the link to be lowercase when it is piped, so I fixed it. Nothing more complicated than that. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

There is equally no need for it to be uppercase, so no fix was needed. No big deal. Dicklyon (talk) 23:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

DYK for The Star-Spangled Man

On 7 May 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Star-Spangled Man, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the production team of the TV series The Falcon and the Winter Soldier created a highway more than five miles (8 km) long to capture visual effects for a truck action sequence for the episode "The Star-Spangled Man"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Star-Spangled Man. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Star-Spangled Man), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Star Trek: Picard Season 3

Incorrect formatting changes in what way? All I did was remove a word. SummeRStorM79 (talk) 03:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

That's not all your edit changed: diff - adamstom97 (talk) 09:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

My apologies. I only meant to remove that word (which is moot, meow). I didn't realize there'd be a cascade effect. I'll try to be more careful in the future. SummeRStorM79 (talk) 14:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

We need WP:NPOV in notices on WikiProject Middle-earth

Adamstom.97, you wrote "...recently given unnecessary disambiguation..." in your notice. That presupposes what the discussion is about, i.e. it is taking sides, the one thing that is absolutely not ok in notices. I'd be very grateful if you could remove the word "unnecessary" to preserve strict neutrality. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

I was just letting people know that the discussion was happening and giving some basic context. Adding disambiguation to an article title when there are no other articles of the same name is commonly described as "unnecessary disambiguation", that is all I meant by that. It is equivalent to saying "redundant disambiguation". Even if I was trying to sway opinions with my wording, I don't believe there is any requirement for talk page notices to have any specific wording. WP:NPOV applies to articles, not talk pages. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing. However you should never use adjectives, especially those that have a strong pejorative meaning like redundant or unnecessary, in any notice. Notices must be strictly and unequivocally neutral in everybody's eyes, which that one certainly was not. Any editor taking upon themselves to issue a notice is responsible for ensuring they are seen not to be trying to influence or canvass in any way, however subtle. I do hope this is clear as it is enforced by policy. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Burden

Hey Adamstom.97! I've been seeing your additions to X-Men '97, overall great work. So I'm also somewhat surprised, with your contributions and experience here, that you reverted again the unsourced claim about Karliak also voicing the Hulk. WP:BURDEN means that anyone that it is up to the person who restores previously unsourced information to add a source. A "citation needed" isn't suitable a placeholder. I'm confident you'll find a source quickly, and I won't remove the bit again to make a point, but like you said so yourself (#Deadpool & Wolverine): all information needs to be supported by a reliable source. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 04:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

The information is currently sourced to the onscreen credits, which does not need an explicit in-line citation because the details that would be in that ref are already provided in the infobox and episode table. This is the same reason that we do not require explicit in-line citations for plot summaries. I have tagged the information with "citation needed" because it is good practice, in my experience, to find third-party sources to support information like cast and cameo details. I'm not trying to add information without a source after telling other people not to do the same lol! - adamstom97 (talk) 09:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Nice work!

Just wanted to thank you for your extra effort at that discussion. It took some extra patience to focus on a way past the stalemate, which you did by coming up with great proposals that ultimately led to a compromise. It would have been just as easy to stay dug in with the numbers on your side. Veteran move, well done! --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, these situations are tricky and I have definitely gotten better at handling them over the years. Hopefully this one doesn't drag on for too much longer. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Heidi Pusey BYU -- Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 20:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Whoops

I just want to apologize about any inconvenience or stress caused by the discussion on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I'm not continuing the GA review until Monday because I'm not working this weekend, but I thought I should tell you that your explanation of the source inclines me to accept it as a source. I didn't expect a decision to be made on by another editor; I just wanted input. I'm new to Wikipedia (I've been on for less than a year) and I guess didn't know about how the Noticeboard worked. I'm sorry I didn't include you in the discussion. I hope this doesn't put a stain on our interactions. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 21:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

No worries, I was just letting you know that you should flick a message or ping involved editors who may not be watching the page you post a message on. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Esposito's role in Captain America: Brave New World

I beg to differ. Pretty sure WP:ANTAGONIST applies to unsourced and subjective descriptions of characters only, while Esposito playing a villain role was backed by RS like THR. An example that comes to mind would be Emma Corrin's role in Deadpool & Wolverine. She was stated as "cast in a lead villain role" as well prior to her role being revealed as Cassandra Nova. — Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 15:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Whether that was correct or not (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), we generally avoid this wording per WP:ANTAGONIST and another editor had already reverted this change a few days ago so it should not just be reinstated without discussion at the article's talk page. - adamstom97 (talk) 15:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

No, I am obviously aware that OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't mean anything, I was only building my point on what should not be viewed as the subjective interpretation stated in WP:ANTAGONIST, which is being backed by multiple RS. I was not aware of someone else making the same edit before, and I do not think I have to leave a comment on an article's talk page for every one of my (copy)edits. But thanks for letting me know that multiple editors find it inappropriate, I will concede if that is the case. Undisclosed role and undisclosed villain are not really that big of a difference. Let's leave it the current way then. Cheers! —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 15:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of "undisclosed role" either, I think that has become way overused of late. I personally don't have a big issue with saying someone is going to be the villain, in my experience I think we tend to be okay with that wording when discussing the casting. But in the cast section I do think it is good to avoid it in general. - adamstom97 (talk) 15:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Got it! Yea I was also wondering why don't we describe Esposito's character a slightly bit more when the source has clearly provided more info than merely an "undisclosed role". Anyway, I will keep that in mind. Thanks for your timely and helpful explanation!! —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Question about Wakanda Forever

So, I saw you reverted my edit on Wakanda Forever. While I did say it was alright, I am confused by your reasoning. Could you explain it more clearly so I can understand the problem? Jayaltwriter2004! (talk) 16:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

You can't just add whatever you want to Wikipedia, everything needs to be supported by a reliable source. See WP:V. Things do get a bit tricky with the lead, which is the opening few paragraphs at the start of the article. Because the lead is just a summary of the rest of the article it generally does not need any in-line citations for verification, but that means it can only include details that are supported by in-line citations in the body of the article. What you added was not supported by what is in the reception section of the article, so that is why I reverted your edit. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

But I gave my reasoning. Not only that, but I also read the reception heading on Wakanda Forever. Isn't that good enough? Jayaltwriter2004! (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

No, you cannot just give your reasoning in the edit summary. You must ensure that everything you add to the lead is also stated in the body of the article and supported by an in-line citation that points to a reliable source outside of Wikipedia. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

......What? Jayaltwriter2004! (talk) 17:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I think you need to do some research on how Wikipedia works. There are links on your talk page that should help you learn about our policies and guidelines. - adamstom97 (talk) 17:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power

The article Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power and Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Heidi Pusey BYU -- Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 20:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power

The article Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power for comments about the article. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power

The article Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power for comments about the article, and Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Heidi Pusey BYU -- Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The release date of The Lord of The Rings: The Rings of Power Season 2 must be fixed.

Since Amazon's official website has revised the release date of The Lord of The Rings: The Rings of Power Season 2, it was originally "The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Season Two will debut globally on 29 August with the first three episodes. Subsequent episodes will roll out weekly each Thursday." has been edited to read "The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Season Two will debut globally on 29 August."

So I think as you are a good editor you will fix the correct release date.

P.S. I apologize for my English skills. I am a Thai person who is not very good at English. I apologize for the inconvenience. P Phongsakon (talk) 11:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

In the future, when you are making a change please explain the reason in your edit summary so other editors know why you are doing it.

Just because they have removed this information from the source does not mean it is not true. They would need to state that is the case or contradict it. For now, we should stick with the current dates until there is updated information for us to use. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

On IMDB's website, the release is listed as one episode per week. Considering that, along with the edits on Amazon's official website, I think you should edit accordingly. P Phongsakon (talk) 12:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source that we can use. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)