User contributions for 2601:246:C700:9B0:7573:9C20:A653:9660

5 December 2019

• 06:1106:11, 5 December 2019 diff hist +45‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ →‎External links: Corrected dead URL issue.
• 06:0606:06, 5 December 2019 diff hist 0‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ Copy edit—sentence required an m-dash rather than a stadard dash and spacing.
• 06:0506:05, 5 December 2019 diff hist +6‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ The "largest by" is an analytical/interpretive statement based on facts not in evidence; it is therefore WP:OR, and needs a citation.
• 06:0206:02, 5 December 2019 diff hist +446‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ →‎By broadcaster: Converted the ranking table to two prose sentences, as this is intended as an article, and prose is favoured over tables, when feasible, in articles. Since the parenthetic "ITV" appears for all entries besides BBC, it seems superfluous to present it in parentheses eight times. See what you think.
• 05:5205:52, 5 December 2019 diff hist 0‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ →‎Full list: Copy edit—wrong character replaced with correct character.
• 05:5105:51, 5 December 2019 diff hist +208‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ →‎Full list: Rewrote the opening sentences of the Full list section, based on what I understood the text heretofore appearing to mean. Please check my interpretation, and correct it if inaccurate.
• 05:4705:47, 5 December 2019 diff hist +30‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ →‎Full list: Until some source appears to cover most of the content in the dates and channels columns of the table, this WP:OR tag must remain for the section—because the table relies almost entirely on editor research, rather than verifiable publications, as it stands.
• 05:4405:44, 5 December 2019 diff hist +686‎ Talk:BFI TV 100 ‎ →‎Red Dwarf
• 05:4005:40, 5 December 2019 diff hist +1,331‎ BFI TV 100 ‎ While it needs to be checked, a source was found that covers almost all of the first Titles column of the list—all except the parenthetic editorial additions, which still must be sourced. We're now up to TWO CITATIONS!
• 05:0205:02, 5 December 2019 diff hist +468‎ Talk:At the Movies (1986 TV program) ‎ →‎Move discussion in progress
• 05:0105:01, 5 December 2019 diff hist +12‎ At the Movies (1986 TV program) ‎ →‎Critics substituting for Roger Ebert, post-surgery: Another whole subsection, crying out "ignore our policies, just trust us".
• 05:0005:00, 5 December 2019 diff hist +34‎ At the Movies (1986 TV program) ‎ Many, many, MANY sentences without the possibility of verification (sans a dissertation project)—even some whole subsections. Not in accord with WP:VERIFY or WP:OR.
• 04:5404:54, 5 December 2019 diff hist +2‎ Up (film series) ‎ Copy edit—missing markup (missing "=") and mistyped character.
• 04:5204:52, 5 December 2019 diff hist −5‎ Up (film series) ‎ →‎Motifs: Copy edit—removed extra markup (extra <ref>). Tag: references removed
• 04:5104:51, 5 December 2019 diff hist +330‎ Up (film series) ‎ Changed citation to youtube Apted interview to the standard cite AV media format, noting at the same time that the citation is missing the rewuired timestamp.
• 04:4904:49, 5 December 2019 diff hist +25‎ At the Movies (1986 TV program) ‎ →‎Ebert & Roeper (2001–07): With all due respect, Wikipedia relies in verifiability to support its aspiration of providing encyclopedic content. And there is not a single reference in this section. Not one. It is therefore plagiarised, or WP:OR, or both.
• 04:2604:26, 5 December 2019 diff hist +131‎ Up (film series) ‎ Tabular material must still be sourced!
• 04:2304:23, 5 December 2019 diff hist −9‎ Up (film series) ‎ Copy edit—repeated verb removed.
• 04:2104:21, 5 December 2019 diff hist +313‎ User talk:Arjayay ‎ →‎Thanks: new section
• 04:2004:20, 5 December 2019 diff hist +335‎ User talk:Jmertel23 ‎ →‎Thanks for your citation-filling help...: new section
• 04:1804:18, 5 December 2019 diff hist +76‎ Up (film series) ‎ I just found the "63 Up" epidodes official website. Either they plagiarised from Wikipedia (!), or our editors lifted parts, verbatim, from this source. (Start by searching for "predetermines" in the lead, then in the cited URL. Or, do a plagiarism check of this whole document against that whole document.) Note, this observation is made despite extensive edits of the last week that have made this article more unique. That is to say, the apparent plagiarism was likely more extensive, earlier.
• 03:4603:46, 5 December 2019 diff hist +18‎ Up (film series) ‎ →‎Creation: Correcting sentence to source. (The source does not say he chose them, only that he was involved in finding them. And other Wikipedia articles credit others in this process as well.)
• 03:4003:40, 5 December 2019 diff hist −4‎ Up (film series) ‎ Copy edit—repeated verb removed.
• 03:3903:39, 5 December 2019 diff hist 0‎ Up (film series) ‎ Updates span, from 56 to 63 years, with the release of "63 Up"; the first film covered 7 years, so the films through the ninth cover 63 years.
• 03:3803:38, 5 December 2019 diff hist +103‎ Up (film series) ‎ Copy edit, punctuation and which/that use. Added a placeholder sentence to added an exemplary accolade to the lede; the Roger Ebert listing, in and of itself, is not enough to capture the near universal praise of the series. (E.g., "63 Up" has an incomparable 100% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes.)