Talk:Roger Craig Smith

Filmography section for Roger Craig Smith

Okay no offense but certain users I encounter they usually say "yes resume is allowed" but here you neglect stuff, besides I am sick and tired of every users belief's and preferences, I thought EVERYTHING has to have A SOURCE.

Now don't get me started, since I had experienced/faced with users such as TheFarix & Cyphoidbomb, since they were very rude and very unflexible unnlike the rest of you. Now back with Roger Craig Smith I'm sorry but what is seriously going on with this page. All what I was doing was trying to find all the sources for the roles to play with, and to be honest it is HARD to find every source on which character he plays. I just never expect that finding everyone of his roles via source is that hard. Finally, I can't believe I'm flattered that you can reject sites like youtube, comicbook sites, HIS own website with his roles on his resume.

Look I'm sorry If I'm going through this long rant but this has gone far enough!. We need to find a solution and resolve this fiasco mess regarding on his filmography.--98.196.41.58 (talk) 01:45, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

1. You might consider creating an account, so we at least know we're talking to the same person. Creating an account will presumably also help other users get to know you, instead of having to deal with a brand-new faceless IP every time you edit. That could be a big part of the problems you are facing--that you have no existing reputation.
2. You are complaining about "every users belief's and preferences" which appear to be based on existing policies and guidelines that you have had some difficulty comprehending, like MOS:BOLD, like original research, like not being able to base major sections of an article on a primary source (i.e. the films themselves, or the actor's own website.) If it hasn't been pointed out to you before, Wikipedia is not IMDb. It is not our aim to list every project that an actor has been in, nor should we. All those "Additional voices" credits that cannot be adequately sourced, are probably not worthy of inclusion. This sort of data is best handled on fansites, or on specialty sites like IMDb.
3. If you're going to accuse other users of being rude, you might wish to check your facts and acknowledge your own participation in the events. At Talk:Michelle Ruff where most of the discussions took place about unnecessary boldface, nobody was rude to you, we tried in good faith to get you to understand the existing policies and guidelines, which you were reluctant to understand, which you later crossposted rants about, and which you are now criticizing as inflexible. I'm not sure what you mean by "inflexible" anyway, since I don't see you proposing any compromise that takes into consideration existing community opinions, while incorporating the information you are eager to include. If by "inflexible" you mean that other users don't give you carte blanche to do what you want, then you have a lot to learn about how community editing works. Reverting another user's edits because you don't find the editor flexible, is not acceptable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:51, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

You are right. Everything does need a source. But it has to be a reliable source. That means no primary sources, which his resume would be. Additionally, a good amount of the sources used are questionable at best. As well, adding a laundry list of roles (again, as Cyphoid stated, we are NOT iMDb) hoping others come along to source them is not how editing works on Wikipedia. It is the content adders burden to also provide the source that stated that content. (Again a reliable source). You can not expect other users to know where you got such information, or to find the sources for you. We had this problem back in November 2013. It was taken care of then, and will continue to be so if others try to readd content like that. On sources, YouTube is acceptable only if it is coming from a reliable source's channel (ie IGN's, AP, etc.); comic book sites are very much reliable - IGN, Comic Book Resources, Newsarama, ComicsAlliance, GameInformer - those are some of the main ones. His site is not (as stated) because of WP:PRIMARY. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info Favre1fan93, then again for some of his other roles he played whether it be video games, anime, original animation, etc.... it will be a tough road to find each source. But I'll keep it in touch. ;)--98.196.41.58 (talk) 13:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Subject's tweet on infobox image

Here is a tweet where Smith has commented on this infobox image. --Tito Dutta (talk) 00:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

@Titodutta: Hi Tito, I'm not clear on the relevance to the article, except for amusement purposes. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

The current image seems to be a cropped one and the only image we have on Commons. If additional free images are found those may be upload on Commons or used in this article after discussion. --Tito Dutta (talk) 03:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Cropped images are preferred if they highlight the subject—it doesn't make sense to show an entire discussion panel if we're interested in one person. There's no obvious reason to change it, except that the subject tweeted a general self-deprecating comment about it. Not sure why we would entertain a change based on that. If there's another rationale for change, I'd be interested in hearing it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)