This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
@Wentwort12: Please don't remove tags without addressing issues. If you feel the image size needs to be adjusted, you can do that appropriately using |upright=. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
well then I would do so, idk why you are being so defensive and unproductive about it. It's an easily done solution Wentwort12 (talk) 23:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
again it's highly highly unnecessary, unless those revert affect the article, then it shouldn't be deleted.
also it's not harmful at all and didn't break any guidelines, it fully comply with them. Wentwort12 (talk) 00:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately that is not accurate - see above for the guidelines at issue. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all.
you are just micromanaging at this point and I don't think this is productive or helpful to said article in anyway. Wentwort12 (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
please bring forward which guidelines it specifically broke and wether it is absolutely necessary to delete said informations! none of this actually contribute significantly to the article Wentwort12 (talk) 00:49, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The specific guideline at issue is MOS:POPCULT - pop-culture references should not be included simply because they exist, but only where there is secondary sourcing establishing cultural impact. At the moment, that isn't happening here. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
as I've said the title of the series are pretty self explanatory. Lord Stormont was ambassador to France, he had a cultural impact of being the ambassador at the time. This wasn't some random appearances, he was featured because of his occupation and this directly correlated with his article and history.
"Consensus at the article level can determine whether particular references which meet this criteria should be included."
especially when it comes to historical figures, most didn't have huge cultural impact but were still depicted because they had some small cultural influence, omitting them just because they didn't have huge culture impact, so some people who didn't care about history to write half hearted article about them and correlating it to the fictional movie Is just counterproductive
I don't think you micromanaging is helpful in this article at all Wentwort12 (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What this guideline is not
This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all.
This guideline does not suggest the inclusion or exclusion of any information; it only gives style recommendations. Issues of inclusion are addressed by content policies.
please cease your counterproductive micromanaging Wentwort12 (talk) 00:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
