Talk:Taylor Kinney

message: I've removed the Irish ancestry claim. Taylor Kinney isn't of Irish descent at all (see this for example). I don't think Lady Gaga should be considered a very reliable source on this matter, and there's no point in repeating an incorrect statement when the article can simply say nothing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ileisigs (talk • contribs) 22:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: EthniCelebs is not a reliable source, just saying. I personally don't see the problem with using Gaga as a source, though the article indeed could simply state nothing about his heritage. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The primary point here is, who's to say what "BF" even means? Quite often it refers to "Best Friend", not "BoyFriend". All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 00:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish ancestry 

message: Lady Gaga & Taylor Kinney are no longer engaged
Sonic1214 (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 20:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally, Gaga has stated that they're on a break, which doesn't necessarily mean they've separated. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2016 

message: People.com confirmed earlier this year that he and Gaga have cancelled their engagement. Added sources to that effect. If anyone wants to remove it, they should explain why on this talk page. Thank you. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Health and Welfare ‖ 05:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engagement 

message: I thought I'd ask this again. I've done it in the past but can't seem to find the conversation and pinging  who did added them in them in the past; but could anyone point out exactly where in WP:FILMOGRAPHY it says we shouldn't use rowspans because I can't seem to find it??? Many articles use rowspans in filmography and it seems like if this existed not very many articles would use them. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:OTHERSTUFF isn't a convincing argument here, but what I was getting at is that we should follow the format used at WP:FILMOGRAPHY, which doesn't feature those at all. Using rowspans also hinders accessibility by messing up the table when trying to sort items, so to be honest, no filmography tables should use them at all. It's bad practice. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that would make sense except there is only one example at WP:FILMOGRAPHY that shows this. NOWHERE does it state that we shouldn't use them that's exactly what it is an EXAMPLE not it has to look exactly like it. And it also says "This WikiProject advice page is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community." Which means its not a set rule that must be followed. And I checked here whether the rowspan is used or not the table sorts the exact same way. TheDoctorWho (talk) 12:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: There at least was at one point a more explicit note saying not to use rowspans (which was removed for no good reason), though my point was it showed an example of what users should implement. It doesn't change the fact that rowspans do more bad than good here. As for a formal guideline, see WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly it was removed for some reason whatever it may be. And should doesn't mean have to implement. Lastly how does it do more good than bad? You're saying it's bad however you're not saying why it's bad??? (Also again could you point me where to exactly in WP:ACCESSIBILITY?) TheDoctorWho Public (talk) 15:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That honestly shouldn't have been removed. The "should doesn't mean have to" point is a blatant cop-out and you know it. In case it wasn't already clear, those do more bad than good because they tend to make it harder to sort tables. It's not worth the trouble. With regards to accessibility, read MOS:DTAB for proper table setup. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It wasn't meant to be a cop-out it was my response to your argument. And here it does no harm whatsoever as I said I checked both ways and whether or not you have the rowspan it sorts exactly the same way. Also I'm either blind or can't read because once again I found nothing in the place you pointed me even mentioning rowspans let alone not allowing use of them. TheDoctorWho (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I should've been more explicit; if you looked at the way those tables in the aforementioned pages were set up, then you'd see how I was implying that it's what we should abide by here. Rowspans have been frowned upon in filmography tables for years and only make them messier than they otherwise would be. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:36, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rowspans in table