This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be
added to this article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Star WarsWikipedia:WikiProject Star WarsTemplate:WikiProject Star WarsStar Wars articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Chile on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
A fact from Pablo Hidalgo appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 January 2017 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
There is a single reliable source
[1] mentioning that Hidalgo pissed off Star Wars fans, and that article mostly consists of screenshots of irate twitterers. I challenge that being
WP:DUE for inclusion in the article.
Schazjmd(talk) 20:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
The source does not support "he insulted a fan for being emotionally invested in Star Wars characters". It supports that he said "emotions are not sharing" and that fans complained. The rest of the article is all about individuals' complaints and criticism. This is a transient, unimportant internet kerfuffle that lacks significance and does not merit mention in an encyclopedia article.
Schazjmd(talk) 20:59, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
[1] Aditional article. It has caused a trend world wide and had an impact. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
174.71.161.68 (
talk •
contribs)
A twitter pile-on trending happens every day.
Schazjmd(talk) 21:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
It's not just a twitter argument, it's getting coverage in actual media. There was the article in
Deseret News I linked to. Routine twitter spats don't get newspaper articles devoted to them.
Wingsandsword (
talk) 21:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Wingsandsword, Routine twitter spats don't get newspaper articles devoted to them. Yes, they do, and Deseret News has a number of "twitter reacts" articles. If in a few weeks there is still ongoing coverage of this and additional attention by multiple sources, it might have legs as a meaningful event, but not at this stage.
Schazjmd(talk) 21:16, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Agree, the only reason this received any coverage is because Star Wars news of any kind pushes traffic. There's very little clarity about what really occurred. This event isn't notable enough to be listed on this article.
Nemov (
talk) 01:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Seems like a ridiculous standard to expect news coverage of this weeks from now. That's neither normal, in this case, nor a requirement of notability. Also this seems like a classic misuse of WP:DUE for content gatekeeping, as it's almost impossible for any source to claim it has a majority viewpoint, but that doesn't mean WP:DUE is license for editors to invalidate reliable sources based on the spectre of silent majority. The text states quite plainly that fans complained about it. Unless that's untrue or there is another perspective to consider, it's not really an issue of WP:DUE at all, it's a sourced statement of fact presented briefly. But more to the point, I'm here to point out the quote is "emotions are not for sharing", there is a typo in the article (quote can be found in the tweet).
161.69.122.15 (
talk) 03:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Does anyone really think, if a biography of Pablo Hidalgo were to be written, that a YouTuber’s overreaction to a leaked tweet that did not actually reference him would merit inclusion? This was not a major event in the subject’s life, and its inclusion smacks of motivated editing by fans of the YouTuber whose feelings were hurt. Most biographical pages do not include social media spats. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
146.115.183.91 (
talk •
contribs)
I agree the topic is ridiculous. However, it did receive significant coverage from multiple reliable sources.
Nemov (
talk) 03:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)reply
A Wikipedia article is not obligated to cover everything that received coverage in multiple sources. A cursory glance at any other notable person’s biography will demonstrate that. What is the purpose of including this fluff, given that there is no consensus to do so on the talk page? This isn’t even the most notable thing to happen on Hidalgo’s social media. It’s only here because a YouTuber took offense and his overzealous fans feel they need to put a black mark on Hidalgo’s Wikipedia page. It should be deleted. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
146.115.183.91 (
talk •
contribs)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Recent quote has a minor typo.
Original : In December of 2020, fans complained that Hidalgo reacted to a fan's video on
Twitter by saying "emotions are not sharing".
Change to: In December of 2020, fans complained that Hidalgo reacted to a fan's video on
Twitter by saying "emotions are not for sharing".
Matvop (
talk) 03:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Hello
146.115.183.91 (
talk·contribs)
Based on
this diff it is clear that you are the one that deleted the content. Numerous editors have reverted your edit because you attempted to portray it as irrelevant. You are the one that must provide justification for this removal, not other editors that are reverting your edit. In my opinion, it is not just some "Twitter random talk" but it has been covered by sources, and the sources have been provided on the section. I will revert again to the stable version, and if you wanted to remove the section, discuss it here first.
SunDawn (
talk) 05:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)reply
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be
added to this article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Star WarsWikipedia:WikiProject Star WarsTemplate:WikiProject Star WarsStar Wars articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Chile on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
A fact from Pablo Hidalgo appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 January 2017 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
There is a single reliable source
[1] mentioning that Hidalgo pissed off Star Wars fans, and that article mostly consists of screenshots of irate twitterers. I challenge that being
WP:DUE for inclusion in the article.
Schazjmd(talk) 20:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
The source does not support "he insulted a fan for being emotionally invested in Star Wars characters". It supports that he said "emotions are not sharing" and that fans complained. The rest of the article is all about individuals' complaints and criticism. This is a transient, unimportant internet kerfuffle that lacks significance and does not merit mention in an encyclopedia article.
Schazjmd(talk) 20:59, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
[1] Aditional article. It has caused a trend world wide and had an impact. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
174.71.161.68 (
talk •
contribs)
A twitter pile-on trending happens every day.
Schazjmd(talk) 21:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
It's not just a twitter argument, it's getting coverage in actual media. There was the article in
Deseret News I linked to. Routine twitter spats don't get newspaper articles devoted to them.
Wingsandsword (
talk) 21:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Wingsandsword, Routine twitter spats don't get newspaper articles devoted to them. Yes, they do, and Deseret News has a number of "twitter reacts" articles. If in a few weeks there is still ongoing coverage of this and additional attention by multiple sources, it might have legs as a meaningful event, but not at this stage.
Schazjmd(talk) 21:16, 28 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Agree, the only reason this received any coverage is because Star Wars news of any kind pushes traffic. There's very little clarity about what really occurred. This event isn't notable enough to be listed on this article.
Nemov (
talk) 01:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Seems like a ridiculous standard to expect news coverage of this weeks from now. That's neither normal, in this case, nor a requirement of notability. Also this seems like a classic misuse of WP:DUE for content gatekeeping, as it's almost impossible for any source to claim it has a majority viewpoint, but that doesn't mean WP:DUE is license for editors to invalidate reliable sources based on the spectre of silent majority. The text states quite plainly that fans complained about it. Unless that's untrue or there is another perspective to consider, it's not really an issue of WP:DUE at all, it's a sourced statement of fact presented briefly. But more to the point, I'm here to point out the quote is "emotions are not for sharing", there is a typo in the article (quote can be found in the tweet).
161.69.122.15 (
talk) 03:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Does anyone really think, if a biography of Pablo Hidalgo were to be written, that a YouTuber’s overreaction to a leaked tweet that did not actually reference him would merit inclusion? This was not a major event in the subject’s life, and its inclusion smacks of motivated editing by fans of the YouTuber whose feelings were hurt. Most biographical pages do not include social media spats. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
146.115.183.91 (
talk •
contribs)
I agree the topic is ridiculous. However, it did receive significant coverage from multiple reliable sources.
Nemov (
talk) 03:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)reply
A Wikipedia article is not obligated to cover everything that received coverage in multiple sources. A cursory glance at any other notable person’s biography will demonstrate that. What is the purpose of including this fluff, given that there is no consensus to do so on the talk page? This isn’t even the most notable thing to happen on Hidalgo’s social media. It’s only here because a YouTuber took offense and his overzealous fans feel they need to put a black mark on Hidalgo’s Wikipedia page. It should be deleted. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
146.115.183.91 (
talk •
contribs)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Recent quote has a minor typo.
Original : In December of 2020, fans complained that Hidalgo reacted to a fan's video on
Twitter by saying "emotions are not sharing".
Change to: In December of 2020, fans complained that Hidalgo reacted to a fan's video on
Twitter by saying "emotions are not for sharing".
Matvop (
talk) 03:25, 29 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Hello
146.115.183.91 (
talk·contribs)
Based on
this diff it is clear that you are the one that deleted the content. Numerous editors have reverted your edit because you attempted to portray it as irrelevant. You are the one that must provide justification for this removal, not other editors that are reverting your edit. In my opinion, it is not just some "Twitter random talk" but it has been covered by sources, and the sources have been provided on the section. I will revert again to the stable version, and if you wanted to remove the section, discuss it here first.
SunDawn (
talk) 05:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)reply
