Editing Eurovision Wiki:Dispute resolution noticeboard (section)

== John Gielgud ==

{{DR case status|closed}}
{{drn filing editor|Spectritus|11:03, 18 March 2026 (UTC)}}
{{DRN archive top|Closed [[without prejudice]] as not discussed recently on the article talk page.  DRN is available for resolving disputes among editors who have discussed a topic at length inconclusively on the article talk page recently, maybe within the past month.  Some of the editors appear to be listed because they took part in discussion in 2024.  This appears to be an effort to reopen discussion that was discussed and closed in 2024, which is reasonable because [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]].  However, that discussion should resume on the article talk page before coming here.  Resume discussion on the article talk page.  If that discussion is lengthy and inconclusive, a new request can be made here.  [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 18:16, 18 March 2026 (UTC)}}

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Have you discussed this on a talk page?'''</span>

Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Location of dispute'''</span>
* {{pagelinks|John Gielgud}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Users involved'''</span>
* {{User|Spectritus}}
* {{User|SchroCat}}
* {{User|Halbared}}
* {{User|Tim riley}}
* {{User|Cinemaniac86}}
* {{User|The One I Left}}
* {{User|Omnis Scientia}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Dispute overview'''</span>

Apparently, a few years ago, there was a consensus to not add an infobox. In 2024, this discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AJohn_Gielgud%2FArchive_1#Infobox_%28yes%2C_yet_again%29, seems to show that the consensus changed but for some reason nothing has happened since.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How have you tried to resolve this dispute before coming here?'''</span>

[[Talk:John_Gielgud/Archive_1]]
[[Talk:John_Gielgud]]

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How do you think we can help resolve the dispute?'''</span>

I personally think that the fact such a thing is debated is ridiculous. I hope that a definitive solution can be found here.

==== Summary of dispute by ShroCat ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>
sorry, but you haven't discussed it. You asked a question a little earlier today that no-one has answered. That's not a discussion. The nub is that you want an IB on the page, but you haven't said so in the discussion and you haven't outlined the reasons why.{{pb}}I have a sinking feeling when reading "{{tq|the fact such a thing is debated is ridiculous}}", as it hardly shows a mind that is open to the viewpoints of others - not that you have so far asked any one '''why''' they may have an issue. DR is supposed to be for when something has already been discussed: why has this step been missed out entirely? - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 15:17, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
@[[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] It was discussed multiple times long before my involvement. And the latest discussion (from 2023–2024) seems to show that consensus changed. And I am open to other people's views. I was just giving my opinion on the matter. [[User:Spectritus|Spectritus]] ([[User talk:Spectritus|talk]]) 15:22, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:Except you haven't given an opinion. You have written "{{tq|Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AJohn_Gielgud%2FArchive_1#Infobox_%28yes%2C_yet_again%29 the consensus seems to have changed but for some reason nothing happened since}}". That's all. As I've said above, you haven't said what you want '''or why'''. Relying on a dead thread from a few years that was never actioned isn't enough. You need to say what you want and why - talk pages are for discussions, and you haven't given anyone anything tangible to discuss. - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 15:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

==== Summary of dispute by Halbared ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

==== Summary of dispute by Tim riley ====
The Wikipedia policy at [[MOS:INFOBOXUSE]] is that IBs are neither required nor prohibited. Whether to include one and which parameters to use is decided by consensus, and there has so far, despite the heavy pressure from IB absolutists, been no such consensus. I think those contributing to the discussion should declare honestly whether they think that every article should have one. For my own part I use IBs where helpful – I have written one article with ''five'' IBs in my time – but they are not helpful to the reader in such articles as this. '''<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">[[User:Tim riley|<span style="color:# 660066">Tim riley</span>]][[User talk:Tim riley|<span style="color:#848484"> talk</span>]]</span>''' 17:42, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
@[[User:Tim riley|Tim riley]] In this article, an infobox would be helpful to easily where he was born and died, his years active, his partner (s), etc. [[User:Spectritus|Spectritus]] ([[User talk:Spectritus|talk]]) 18:12, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
==== Summary of dispute by Cinemaniac86 ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

==== Summary of dispute by The One I Left ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

==== Summary of dispute by Omnis Scentia ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

=== John Gielgud discussion ===
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.</div>
{{DRN archive bottom}}