New comments, questions and concerns go on the bottom of this page. Please use the "New section" tab above if you have a new topic! If you post here I will respond here; other interested parties may want to follow the conversation, and it's rude to force them to jump back and forth. Similarly, if I post to your talk page, please respond there. Don't bother with talkback templates, I watchlist all pages as needed.
Archives: 2004–2009, 2010, January–June 2011, July–December 2011, January–June 2012, July–December 2012, January–June 2013, July–December 2013, January–June 2014, July–December 2014, January–June 2015, July–December 2015, January–June 2016, July–December 2016, January–June 2017, July–December 2017, January–June 2018, June–December 2018, January–June 2019, July–December 2019, January–June 2020
Your revert of my editEdit
You are invited to comment at Talk:Washington Examiner#Refutation to the Washington Examiner's editorial stance. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I removed it from the lede in part due to WP:UNDUE. This paragraph in the lede outweighs the paragraph before it by a considerable amount. It sets the tone for the entire article. Fine if a mention is made in the lede, but it should be balanced, perhaps by accomplishments of the NYPD, and allow the appropriate section to carry the weight of it. Further, the fiction paragraph is completely uncited and has little business belonging in the lede section. Fictionalized narratives about the NYPD are not the NYPD itself and should not be in the lede. What do you think? --Hammersoft (talk) 21:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
- Mention if the NYPD being commonly depicted in fiction because of New York's size and prominence is a major aspect of the NYPD in the broader culture. It definitely and absolutely needs to be mentioned somewhere in the article, if not the lead. The paragraph itself was already in the lead before the section was split off into another article. The lack of citations are an implementation of WP:LEADCITE and don't disqualify it. The big issue is that when the list off appearances was split off as a separate article no summary of the article was left behind as needed by WP:SUMMARY.
- As for the other paragraph, I don't think it's undue at all. The NYPD is a hugely controversial police force, which is one of its truly defining characteristics, and to not mention that in the lead is to give insufficient weight to a major aspect of the article. I don't think it unbalanced And considering that some have been trying to bluntly delete the entire well-referenced section as part of a POV-pushing whitewashing, it means it's even more necessary to keep that summary in the lead. oknazevad (talk) 22:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think edit warring by POV pushers counts as justification to place it in the lede. Also, yes, there is controversy about the NYPD especially now. But, recentism is also not a reason to overly weigh down the lede with a section that outweighs the rest of the lede. As an example, it would be the same as allowing the sex abuse scandal at Penn State Nittany Lions football to dominate the lede. In NYPD's case, it's wrong to have the lede so heavily weighed down by it, and ignores 175 years of other history. I don't object to there being some mention of this, but making it the majority of the lede is wrong. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Curious about non-revertEdit
This is in reference to the edit you did on the page: "9mm Browning Long" on 2020 June 25 at 21:57
I noticed you changed my edit back...but didn't flag it as a revert. Any particular reason for that??
Also, you didn't put in an edit description, so I'm not certain why you even changed it at all.
Please clarify for me.
- The clause is not clarifying that cartridge is semi-rimmed, but introducing the separate but related fact that the cartridge headspaces on the rim, as opposed to the mouth of the case as in some other cartridges. As such, a semicolon is correct to use. Also, even if it were appropriate to use a dash, using two hyphens for a dash is an old typewriter convention and not used on Wikipedia. Please see MOS:DASH for the preferred use. oknazevad (talk) 20:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)