Talk:Gilles Vigneault

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 06:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Epeefleche, may I ask you about the reasons why you have significantly shortened the article itself by deleting a large amount of information on several occasions? Thank you in advance. Paroles2000 (talk) 23:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's already been explained -- per wp:v, and per cleanup request lodged five years ago.  Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed.  Wikipedia is not a repository for information that fail to meet wp:v, though some editors seem to think that is the case. Feel free always to restore any deleted information with inline citations to RS sources. Also -- if re-adding information with the required inline RS citations, please add the citations after each entry (not before) ... that way other editors can distinguish, when more is added to the list, that you have not vouched for the new material with a ref that precedes the list.  Tx.  Best. --Epeefleche (talk) 00:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide inline cites (per wp:burden) for each of the honours you have added back. The place to put the inline refs, in that list, is after each honour. Thanks. Epeefleche (talk) 21:58, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reasons for deleting information? 

message: Per the tag on the article, and per wp:v, please do not restore any challenged/deleted material without supplying an RS inline cite. --Epeefleche (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added an inline cite for you.  However, wp:v says  "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation".  You should learn to distinguish between material that can be challenged, which should be removed, and important material that isn't contentious, which should be kept.  The Steve  11:51, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The material was in fact challenged.  Both by a tag and by removal.  Thus, it satisfies the criteria. Also -- the citation format is incorrect.  You can't simply tag a section header -- otherwise, a reader has no way of knowing whether material was added after, that is not reflected in the ref.  Instead, you have to add your ref subsequent to the entries to which it relates.  We put refs subsequent to material to which refs relate, not before. --Epeefleche (talk) 16:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It relates to the entire section.  Please note that the section also has general references, per WP:GENREF, particularly items 2 and 5.  The tag for the discography was a cleanup tag, not a citation needed tag.  So it had references, and a cleanup tag, which means that you should have cleaned up the section in question by adding inline cites using the sources already provided, not deleted the entire section.  Wikipedia has many policies, and you should keep more than just one of them in mind when you are attempting to clean up an article. See, for instance WP:When to cite.  The Steve  03:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Cleanup is a broad term.  Why do you believe it does not include the addition of RS refs that would bring the article into compliance with wp:v?  And why do you believe that one ref is sufficient to support a multi-paragraph addition?  And why do you believe one needs to tag text that is not compliant with wp:v before removing it -- in any event?  And why do you believe you are entitled to add text that is not compliant with wp:v? And why do you believe that a cleanup tag indicates what I "should" do?  And why do you believe that it is against wp policy to delete material that is not cited to an RS? Especially when it has been challenged?  And why do you use the phrase "you should" so much? Epeefleche (talk) 03:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I do believe it includes the addition of inline references.  You did not add them, despite there being general references, you removed the entire section, and that is my problem.  There are six references, but only one inline one.  wp:v removal does not apply to all things in an article, were you not aware of this?  It applies to: Quotations, Close paraphrasing, Contentious statements about living people, Exceptional claims, and other statements.  It does not apply to General common knowledge, Subject-specific common knowledge (for instance, the songs and albums that a musician has authored), and Plots of the subject of the article.  From wp:v: When tagging or removing material for lacking an inline citation, please state your concern that there may not be a published reliable source for the content, and therefore it may not be verifiable. If you think the material is verifiable, try to provide an inline citation yourself before considering whether to remove or tag it. <--pretty sure you skipped this step.  It's not exactly hard to find out & show that Gilles Vigneault has a large body of musical work.  The Steve  10:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited material 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gilles Vigneault. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140703235557/http://ecolegvigneault.toutemonecole.com:80/ecole.php?e=183 to http://ecolegvigneault.toutemonecole.com/ecole.php?e=183
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gilles Vigneault. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303225918/http://canadacouncil.ca/en/council/prizes/cumulative-list to http://www.canadacouncil.ca/en/council/prizes/cumulative-list
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://ecolegvigneault.toutemonecole.com/ecole.php?e=183
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:19, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified