Talk:Shirley Coryndon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

infobox[edit]

the m:Objective_Revision_Evaluation_Service indicates that the infobox adds to the quality of this article. if you have questions about the algorithm, ask there.
i presented objective evidence, and you presented a subjective personal essay. Beatley (talk) 18:39, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain why you think this infobox is in any way an improvement on this article? CassiantoTalk 18:45, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
i do not "think": it ORES says -
with infobox "B": 0.0210501882918298, "C": 0.0353715360713943, "FA": 0.0022212558146308954, "GA": 0.008359664816324717, "Start": 0.6039562175026347, "Stub": 0.3290411375031854 [1]
without infobox "B": 0.017376208902974293, "C": 0.03728389340564461, "FA": 0.0020169749742451116, "GA": 0.008084433890642086, "Start": 0.5290789107271683, "Stub": 0.4061595780993255 [2].
do you have an objective fact to consider ? Beatley (talk) 23:10, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
See Talk:Marion Parris Smith for why ORES is useless or counterproductive for this task of determining whether an infobox is actually a helpful addition. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
please provide objective evidence why an infobox is not an improvement. Beatley (talk) 21:46, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The onus is on you to justify why one should be added. CassiantoTalk 21:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
the onus is on you to collaborate. you may imagine that your blocking of progess on 200 biographies is collaboration, but it is a matter of time until a consensus shouts you down. whenever, you have some objective metric to support you essay, then you might have something constructive to say.