Talk:Sergio Franchi

message: Hi everyone !!! here's User:Rei Momo from IT.Wiki. I Made the Latin page of my friend Sergio Franchi. You can use the picture, because I put free license. It will be nice to put a picture of Sergio also iin English page.
Can you help me? Good luck!!!
Rei Momo It. Wiki
193.58.223.72 (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Sergio 

message: I removed the section on his interests. Wiki is not a tabloid. --BwB (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's not all you removed! You removed almost 2,000 words of my article in progress! This was rude and major interference from a fellow editor! We have both already commented at length on my talk page, your talk page, and with other editor. For the record, I completely disagree that the section on his interests is tabloid in nature... Nor is the information on his family demographics. Sergio Franchi's classic car collection was a very important collection.. as was shown by the references. It was at least as important as John Denver's airplane collection.. which was discussed in his biography.Cathlec (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Use this template  at the top of the article. . Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 16:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Leszek Janczuk: Big helpCathlec (talk) 17:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

text: I responded on your talk page. You did not add a template, but a navigational box. First, create the template with the navigational box in the template, then add the template to the article not the navigational box. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 21:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here to answer your help request, and I didn't see any vandalism. If I am wrong, please re-open this request. Cheers --andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 23:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section 

message: This reads like a fan page, not an encyclopedia entry. Way too much detailed information, especially in the bottom third of the entry. Also, it doesn't have a neutral POV and almost gushes over the subject of the biography. It's a little nauseating, frankly, and unprofessional. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 16:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much information! 

message: I second the comment above and find that it reads like some kind of press release put out by a publicist. It's way too long and detailed considering this man was not a major global star.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.68.79.202 (talk) 14:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reads like publicity piece 

message: :::To 69.125.134.86 (talk) Strange to have two unsigned, anonymous POV comments at the same time. The article was meticulously researched, and the POV therefore is a reflection of the sources cited. The article does not contain flowery adjectives...that would have been flagged by a "bot." Actually, none of the editors on Wikipedia are professionals...we are all unpaid amateurs. I do agree that there is too much detailed information in some sections, and will try to reduce where possible. To 72.68.79.202 (talk) Again, another anonymous comment. The Wikipedia criteria for a biography is "noteworthy" -- Not "major global star." Catherine LeckieCathlec (talk) 17:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  To talk and talk: I have edited out a portion of the details on the 60s, 70s, and 80s; removed two photos, and removed most of the Trivia entries. Being shorter, I feel that the article now reads better. I have read the POV discussion guidelines. If you have any Specific criticism about POV language, please list them.  While realizing that some editors might have differing opinions, it is my opinion that the POV tag should be removed.Cathlec (talk) 22:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reply to POV comments 

message: I too agree with others here that the page is written like a fan page, not a professional article. Lots of details and facts are great, but they are laid out in such an unorthodox manner. One of the reasons I originally went to Franchi's page was to find out when and how he died. I quickly discovered there was no "Later life and death" section, or anything comparable, and it took me quite a while just to find out this information. It's like the article's author was ga ga for him. I just want to know the facts.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by YouarelovedSOmuch (talk • contribs) 20:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Were this a fan magazine the presentation would be fine but it is supposed to be encyclopedia article. I'll start revising it piecemeal. Motsebboh (talk) 01:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone thorugh the article piece by piece. It still needs a lot of work, still contains excessive information, still is not up to Wikipedia standards, etc. But it's a step better than it was. YouarelovedSOmuch (talk) 10:49, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page needs a lot of help