Archives

1

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Coriantumr (son of Omer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coriantumr (son of Omer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Goldsztajn (talk) 20:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Goldsztajn. Per the LDS topic-ban, I will not be participating in the deletion discussion. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 21:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are working hard on the article on King Kong. It is still quite a ways a way from GA to be sure, but good work. After all the information is in there and the sources cited, the next thing will be copy edits and organizing everything. I would help if I could, though my current projects have kept me swamped. If you need advice, just send me a message. Paleface Jack (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack: Thank you! I deeply appreciate the feedback and offer for advice. I'm currently working on further developments for the "Criticism of racism and sexism" section, but hopefully I'll be adding it this week. I will definitely reach out for advice. My main concerns with the page as it currently is involve organization and how detailed certain sections should be. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 23:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of racism and sexism boils down to controversy. As it stands, the film is neither racist or sexist, though finding the nine neutral ground shall be a challenge. As for organization and what to add, you can split things into different articles if the length becomes a significant issue. Familiarize yourself with featured articles and take inspiration on their structure. In my personal projects, the biggest one that approaches the scope of Kong is my work on The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, those are always interesting sifting through information. Considering how much influence Kong has, that is gonna be pretty big. There are some literary sources that have not been cited for Kong on the bottom of the page you can take a look at if you ever get stuck. Paleface Jack (talk) 03:58, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I feel that the film isn't racist/sexist to the extent that film critics make it out to be; however, there is quite a bit of criticism surrounding it, which is worth including. Do you think it would be worth it to see if I could find some film critics who don't think it's racist/sexist and include their thoughts? That way we'd get a fuller picture of the situation. I'm also thinking about changing the section name to something that might come across as more neutral, for lack of a better word, maybe something like "Controversy".

I'll certainly take a look at those other essays at the bottom—not sure why I didn't notice those in the first place. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 17:31, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To get a neutral balance, yes. It adds perspective. If you are stuck on organizing and structuring things let me know. Paleface Jack (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Heidi Pusey BYU: I have noticed that you have stopped editing the Kong article. Perhaps you have moved on to others. I am curious if you plan on making any projects up to GA or FA status? If you don't know how, I can still advise you on that and point out more improvements. At the moment, I placed a major expansion on pause to work in one of the most complex film articles I have had to deal with, but I will still be able to answer any questions or whatnot as soon as I can. Paleface Jack (talk) 04:47, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not planning on doing GA for King Kong. I've been working on it since December and have become pretty weary of it. I feel like I've done what I can for the page and it's now someone else's turn to do what they can. And thank you for your kind offer; I really appreciate it. Best, Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 22:10, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Heidi Pusey BYU: I know the feeling. It is a massive undertaking and you did the best you could. Taking a break from the material is always good so you can build skills and knowledge through other projects. I have done the same thing with my expansion on The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, might return to that once I finish expanding Begotten, both through userspaces for edits. If you start running out of projects, I do have some userspace articles than can be worked on until they can be transferred into the main space. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:16, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack Thank you for understanding. I'm retiring from Wikipedia soon, but I'd be happy to help with those articles if I end up with some extra time this week. Best, Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 23:50, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Heidi Pusey BYU:Pity that you are retiring so soon. Losing interest? Paleface Jack (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Paleface Jack No, something came up in my personal life leading to my decision. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds about right. Things like that happen. If you require advice on any projects feel free to message me. Paleface Jack (talk) 16:20, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited King Kong (1933 film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Armstrong, Victor Wong and Jack Driscoll.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is Scorpions1325 editing under another account. I'm sorry you had such a bad experience here. What happened to you and your team was shocking to me, and can only be explained by an anti-religious double standard. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 18:16, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Knowledge Pirate: Thanks for reaching out. I stumbled across your comment, but after responding I will permanently cease my participation on Wikipedia. I deeply appreciate your kindness during my time here; it's people like you who made such a difficult experience easier to bear. Best of luck as you continue your work here, Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 01:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]