Welcome!
{{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking |
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
|
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous
|
Your thread has been archived
![]() |
Hello 781h! The thread you created at the Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
See also the help page about the archival process.
The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing |
Speedy deletion declined: 50 Great Voices
Hello 781h. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of 50 Great Voices, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: removced the copyrighted section instead. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:35, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
Logical order
Although it's reasonable for an article about a person to have "early life" at the beginning, an article about a work of fiction should have the synopsis at the beginning, as that's what readers are most likely to want to know about.
That said, thank you for adding the infobox and cover art. DS (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
- @DragonflySixtyseven: Is there a policy that says that anywhere you can point me to? I'm kind of new here. Also if it doesn't go there it could go before the "reception" section, that would make more sense to me. 781h (talk) 17:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
- While there is no formal policy, it can be considered to be an application of the principle "don't bury the lede".
- Logically, the information that readers are most interested in should be presented first. This is the synopsis. It is why people look at articles about works of fiction. They want to know what a story or book is about.
- The argument that information about the book's origin should come before information about the book's content, simply because the book's origin occurred prior to the book's writing, is not a logical one. DS (talk) 03:23, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
![]() |
Hello 781h! The thread you created at the Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
See also the help page about the archival process.
The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing |
GA
I didn't just write the origin section, I created the whole thing. And I think you've jammed way too much information into the lede.
But sure, go ahead with the GA nom. DS (talk) 16:20, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
