User talk:GhostOfDanGurney

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

It's still "Discretionary sanctions" to me, damnit! (alerts)
Honestly, please just assume that if a topic I'm editing in is contentious, I'm aware of it. I've browsed the backend of Wiki long enough.

NASCAR Race Network Table

What was the point of removing the network table on the NASCAR on television and radio page? It’s useful to many. If it isn’t returning then its info should be speared out to other articles like the NASCAR on NBC, and ESPN articles. Nostalgia Zone (talk) 19:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On deleting vs. moving a page

Hi @GhostOfDanGurney: I am the author who put up the page Sanjay Kumar Verma, which you have earmarked for deletion. At this point, you have also stated I started a "move-war", which wasn't my intention. Two questions:

1. Given that we are waiting on a verdict on the deletion, should I wait on that, or move it to draftspace. 2. Why did you delete a source that stated he was recalled? If you had added a source saying he was expelled, it would be neutral. Removing an official government source and replacing with a news source seems to introduce bias, not remove it.

Despite my tone, I am asking in good faith, because you definitely seem to know what you're doing. Researchmoreorless (talk) 12:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Researchmoreorless: The article was nominated for deletion because you had challenged the move of the article back to draft. If I had moved it again to draftspace, I would have been continuing the move war. I also discovered that the article had previously been deleted by a discussion consensus last January so it's fair to notify the editors who participated in that discussion as well and give them a chance to see if their opinions have changed since then.

1) You should not move the article any further. Editors may decide that an "alternative to deletion" (or WP:ATD) is to return the article to the draft, which I also suggested in my nomination. In that case it will be moved there after the discussion has been closed by an admin.

2) I removed that because it was based on a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. The official Indian government narrative is going to be different from the media reports, and including only one government's take but not the other's does not adhere to the neutrality policy. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 16:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert your close

Please revert your close of the Luigi Mangione AfD, it wasn't snowing nor should non-admins close controversial AfDs. E_F⁵ 13:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at DRV, since one here wasn't waited on. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 17:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DRV discussion

Deletion review for Luigi Mangione

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Luigi Mangione. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. E_F⁵ 13:38, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello GhostOfDanGurney, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,
Abishe (talk) 23:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 23:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Abishe: Thank you! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you too. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 23:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for your edit on Montoya's page. The way that the Mb2347 guy abbreviates team names drives me nuts. Electricmemory (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAMB

Hi, thank you for your contributions. I note your recent reverts at Bubba Wallace.

Note that, per WP:NAMB, It is usually preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous.

In the case of Bubba Wallace, there is no ambiguity, since there are no other Bubba Wallaces on Wikipedia. The redirect Darrell Wallace Jr., as you pointed out, is also unambiguous, since Darrell Wallace is not a Jr.

Therefore, there is no realistic way that somebody seeking Darrell Wallace would end up at Bubba Wallace; the hatnote is unnecessary. 162 etc. (talk) 04:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@162 etc.: Someone searching for "Darrell Wallace" on any major search engine is going to get results for the racing driver and not the CFL player. One must add "CFL" or "football" to a search in order to find the CFL player. It is odd that Wikipedia does not reflect this.

Darrell Wallace should likely be moved to Darrell Wallace (football) (or whatever the exact naming convention is for American CFL players) because by no means is "Darrell Wallace" an unambiguous term. It should either also redirect to Bubba Wallace or serve as a DAB page for the two articles. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 04:22, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to starting an RM at Darrell Wallace, although I don't believe the NASCAR driver is very well known by this name.

Currently, however, the hatnote at Bubba Wallace is unjustified. 162 etc. (talk) 05:17, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@162 etc. Bubba was somewhat well known as "Darrell Wallace" with and without the "Jr" suffix for some time following his debut. I'm inclined to agree with the Ghost. Electricmemory (talk) 06:32, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, and the hatnote at Darrell Wallace addresses that potential ambiguity. What I'm objecting to here is the hatnote at Bubba Wallace - in what scenario does somebody seeking the football player arrive at this article? 162 etc. (talk) 07:15, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A scenario in which someone has clicked on the first result, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubba_Wallace, after having done a search on Google, Bing, Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, etc., for "Darrell Wallace" ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 09:54, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAMB asks us to consider "a reader who is following links within Wikipedia". 162 etc. (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then this is a case where common sense > P&Gs and therefore WP:IAR is valid. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 20:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Darrell Wallace

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Darrell Wallace. 162 etc. (talk) 21:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]