This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of Nicole Kim Donesa be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Requesting extended confirmed protection due to edit war
editThis edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want extended confirmed protection for this article as there is an edit war going on.
- See Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Hosumyng123, WP:BLP is strict on this. Even assuming that your source DOTS Ph [1] counts as an ok source per WP:DOB, it doesn't say born 1994. Just because something is online does not mean it's a WP:RS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Hosumyng123, you wrote ": please stop your disruptive edit you are a swedish user how could you even know her) " I don't know her but I know WP. celebsagewiki.com is very obviously not a WP:RS, again, just because something is online does not mean it's a WP:RS. Because WP:EW I'll wait for someone else to revert you, however, see WP:3RRNO #7. Consider self-reverting you latest addition. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:38, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Hosumyng123, per GMA Network that looks like a better source. Now, add the inline citation in the article, see WP:TUTORIAL, otherwise it is likely someone will remove it again. Also, while edit summaries are good (but it's not where to put the references), it is better to do actual discussion on talkpages. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Hosumyng123, you really need to stop this disruption immediately. See the Three-Revert Rule for why. There is a strict rule about making claims, even seemingly neutral or positive claims such as dates of birth, in articles about living persons. A social media source is not considered reliable for these purposes. See the links I left on your user talk page for more information. Do not revert again without providing a reliable, independent source that meets the requirements of the verifiability and reliable sourcing policies. Unlike Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I do not feel that the GMA source is acceptable for a basic information claim such as DoB since it is just repeating a social media post without any apparent attempt at independent verification. Thank you. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:21, 21 December 2020 (UTC)