Template:Vital article

Edit request on 10 February 2019

((request edit)) has been deprecated. Please change this template call to one of the following:

If you simply need to ask for help in making an edit, please change the template to ((help me)). Shapiro's views on Islamic radicalism should be addressed. I am not an expert on this and cannot find sources that are reliable enough. But if someone is free to lend a hand, a good place to start is to read Ben Shapiro says a majority of Muslims are radicals, published by PolitiFact. The article consists of the original source (the original YouTube video), and argues against Shapiro. I think it is a great source and follows WP:NPOV. Thanks, and let me know if more explanation is required. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 16:28, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This used to be in the article but was removed by Drmies here. Please obtain consensus on the talk page before requesting a specific wording. I don't have an opinion on this but there is enough back-and-forth that this merits discussion. wumbolo ^^^ 17:09, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you User:Wumbolo and User:ImmortalWizard. I have removed many "opinions" from many articles; in most cases these "opinions" are sourced only to the opinionator, and are not in themselves noteworty--imagine if every opinion by every notable person was deemed worthy of inclusion. Opinions can become noteworthy if secondary sources report on them and devote some significant attention to them. Whether that's the case here can be decided, as you suggest, in a discussion among editors. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If its in Bens book whats the problem? Is drmies a jew who loves ben or a muslim? Surely his bias needs to be taken into account?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Apemonkey1 (talk • contribs) 8:47, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Apemonkey1 please use sources to support your claims and don't personally attack other editors, thanks-SharabSalam (talk) 10:29, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability discussion

Disclaimer: Biased

It's sad to say but I don't see any critics for or against him. He mostly achieved his fame through controversial publicity and politically polarization North America, mostly on the internet. For someone who became infamous due to their opinion should have as many views and critics written about, as possible. I think his views on radical Islamism is quite extreme in this context and should be included. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 12:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox caption

Should be "June 2016" or "(June 2016)" but it does not need to state his name. His name is right above the picture, and also the title of the article. For reasons explained in detail inWP:YOUDONTSAY, I think the caption should remove his name (and same for every other article on WP). Leviv ich 23:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting essay. It says "strive to omit obvious details from articles." That would seem to apply here. I find acceptable the present form, reading: At Politicon in Pasadena, California, June 2016. Bus stop (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's fairly normal practice to include last name. Either the parenthetical for the date or the comma are both fine. Pasadena, California could probably be shortened to just "Pasadena". I don't know that Pasadena is a town that has a fairly common name that needs to be disambiguated. If you're referring to London, Kentucky or London, Ohio, then yeah, you need the state there obviously. GMGtalk 16:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "California" can be eliminated; the internal link would indicate the great state of California. But are you saying "Shapiro" should be in the caption? Bus stop (talk) 16:56, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It can be. I imagine it might be confusing for someone who has images disabled due to bandwidth issues. GMGtalk 17:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. How would I disable images to check this out? Bus stop (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.thewindowsclub.com/disable-images-chrome-firefox-ie GMGtalk 17:21, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That seems pretty interesting. I briefly checked it out. I'll have to look into it at another time. I was thinking it was going to be a preference in Wikipedia. Thanks for the link. Bus stop (talk) 17:44, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's mostly something for people who have very poor internet access, which is still a group of people we're writing an encyclopedia for. But it's something to keep in mind when writing captions. They should generally stand alone, without the need for an image, and should explain what the image is even if you can't see it. GMGtalk 17:49, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do captions still appear when images are disabled? Or are captions also disabled when images are disabled? (I should have just asked that question in the first place.) Bus stop (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. As far as I am aware. Definitely on Chrome. I don't know how it works. I haven't been computer savvy since back in the days when you could buy books on HTML 4 at the bookstore. Presumably it just blocks the most common file types from loading. I don't know if there are some file types that would be so rare as to not be blocked, but still supported by the browser. Presumably no. GMGtalk 18:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Even with images disabled, "Ben Shapiro" would still appear above the caption, so it would look like:
Ben Shapiro
At Politicon in Pasadena, June 2016 Leviv ich 18:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The current version is ok, personally I would write it "Shapiro at Politicon in Pasadena, California, 2016" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk • contribs)
I agree with Gråbergs Gråa Sång. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 13:29, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding Ben Shapiro because: it is not clear who is that guy. It is hard to understand and assume. Could it his partner, guru, twin, place, or what? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:08, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is absolute b.s., it is more than abundantly clear who the image is of. If you do it again, I will' open an ANI report about your editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: threatening is generally discouraged. That being said, if you indeed think this is B.S., why don't try to change it as a norm? I mean look at any other article. Majority of pages have captions with names. Why don't you start a discussion and make it a rule to not have these? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:58, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And disruptive editing against consensus is absolutely a violation of policy. You've been warned, not threatened. Also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I am convinced it's not a threat. However, I am not using WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If it is "B.S" enough I would suggest you to try propose it as an amendment. According to you then, all other articles with captions with names are "B.S." You might think it is B.S., that doesn't mean others think it is B.S. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) ANI and edit warring are not substitutes for dispute resolution. I suggest having an RfC with a few options that have already been discussed here. Whichever option has the most support will be the caption. Until then, the status quo version should probably be restored.- MrX 🖋 22:27, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
MrX I was about to that. But I did not Wikipedia chooses majority. Are you sure about that? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, per WP:IAR and common practice in cases involving editor discretion and multiple choices, for example lead images and captions. - MrX 🖋 22:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MrX as you suggested, I will start over the RFC again. But it would be appreciated if you could do that and show a demo. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CAPLENGTH: "Infoboxes normally display the page name as the title of the infobox. If nothing more than the page name needs to be said about the image, then the caption should be omitted as being redundant with the title of the infobox." Leviv ich 00:51, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ImmortalWizard, it's not complicated
Which caption should be used in the infobox?
A: 2016
B: Shapiro in 2016 (staus quo version)
C: At Politicon in Pasadena, California, June 2016
D: Shapiro at Politicon in Pasadena, California, June 2016
E: June 2016, Politicon, Pasadena, California
- MrX 🖋 01:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Categories