Talk:Nicholas Hoult

	Nicholas Hoult is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 28, 2024.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 6, 2018 Good article nominee Listed June 12, 2018 Featured article candidate Promoted September 16, 2018 Peer review Reviewed A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 7, 2022. Current status: Featured article

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nicholas Hoult article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

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 sourced must 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 FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers 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 This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Mid-importance). Berkshire Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Berkshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Berkshire 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.BerkshireWikipedia:WikiProject BerkshireTemplate:WikiProject BerkshireBerkshire Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

How can this have been identified as 'exemplary'? It's slightly longer than the Churchill entry, consists entirely of puff and needs reducing to within an inch of its life. The point of an encyclopedia is to allow people to look things up quickly, not to make them lose the will to live. Since it's mostly written by his PR people maybe they could make a start. Sartoresartus (talk) 12:07, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have suggestions for improvement, or did you just come here to complain? Also, do you have evidence that this article has been in any way written by Hoult's PR people? DonIago (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit: so just because there is a reliable source for something, it doesn't mean we include it; we're not indiscriminate (not surprising the "residence" field was removed from infobox person in this RfC); where a person currently lives (with no other context) has no bearing on understanding the subject... it's basically trivia; and per WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD, this is a new addition and it's been reverted, so consensus for its inclusion should be built on the Talk page. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

STATUSQUO and BRD do not advise us to revert two different users. Aside from the points I made in my already-linked edit summary, I'll say that removing the "residence" parameter had more to do with not overwhelming the infobox. Multiple users in that discussion even suggested that it would be appropriate to mention one's residence in prose in the "personal life" section. While it is not as important as their nationality or birthplace, a person's residence is a location with which they have associated themselves, so it is simply not trivia. What other context is necessary? Type of property? Number of years of residency? Roommates?

Here are some WP:OSE examples of BLPs, including some FA-level articles, that do not adhere to your principle that current residences with little to no context do not warrant inclusion: Amy Adams, Andrew Garfield, Anna Kendrick, Anne Hathaway, Billy Eichner, Bryce Dallas Howard, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Chelsea Handler, Christian Bale, Christopher Nolan, Cillian Murphy, Dakota Johnson, Daniel Kaluuya, Elizabeth Olsen, Emma Watson, Ethan Hawke, Greta Gerwig, Jennifer Lawrence, Jessica Chastain, Jimmy Fallon, Joaquin Phoenix, Jonathan Bailey, Joy Behar, Julianne Moore, Katherine Heigl, Kristen Stewart, Kristen Wiig, LaKeith Stanfield, Lupita Nyong'o, Margot Robbie, Maya Rudolph, NeNe Leakes, Nicole Richie, Oscar Isaac, Paul Dano, Paul Mescal, Patrick Wilson, Paul Rudd, Pedro Pascal, Richard Madden, Rosie O'Donnell, Ryan Reynolds, Sarah Paulson, Scarlett Johansson, Taron Egerton, Theo James, Wanda Sykes, Zoë Kravitz. I hope this list helps your conviction to rectify those articles' mistakes. KyleJoan^talk 01:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Nottedeluce is edit-warring at this Featured Article to restore his badly written, misformatted version. English is not his native tongue, and he's introduced many blatant grammatical and style errors, such as redundancies and italicizing quotations. Another editor helpfully fixed the text, correcting the errors and fixing the badly written English, and was instantly reverted.

I started fixing his errors manually, and quickly realized that there were too many to make it worthwhile, so I restored the good version, only to see it instantly reverted. At this point, within a couple of hours he's reverted me twice, and the other editor once, leaving such edit summaries as his last: "My English is not correct. It is not my native language. For me it is a good article. DON'T DISREGARD THE WORK OF OTHERS!!" He's getting out of hand. Carlstak (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have warned the editor in question. We probably need to revert back to the Dec 9 version to undo the questionable changes. —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I share Carlstak's concern and concur with Joeyconnick's suggestion to revert, which I did just now. The article is now back to this version. The issues with Nottedeluce's edits were too great to let slide. KyleJoan^talk 09:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've notified an admin of Nottedeluce's behavior, including the five reverts he's made so far in less than 24 hours. If he continues his edit-warring, we should get some action to stop the nonsense. Carlstak (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Returning to the article is throwing away all the work and time of several users, invested in making a good and updated article Nottedeluce (talk) 12:46, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Volver a esa edición del 9 de septiembre, es dejar un artículo que no es neutro y desactualizado. Nottedeluce (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"it's getting out of hand" when all I'm trying to do is make a good article Nottedeluce (talk) 12:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to continue editing the article. Providing true data and information to create a good final article.

I will do it little by little, over the days, so that you have time to read and verify that it is true and neutral.

I start today with a small part. I have as much right as you to write. and I have you not blocked it. You block me because you hate that I change the article. Nottedeluce (talk) 12:49, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, this is English Wikipedia, and if you're going to use the talk page you have to use English, not Spanish. You call yourself a new Wikipedian, but your own talk page shows that you've had a WP account since 2015—eight years ago. When you make major changes to an established article, especially a Featured one, you need to propose on this talk page the changes you want to make, and discuss them with other editors who might object to them, or who may suggest modifications to your proposal. These changes are subject to consensus, and you have to gain a consensus before you make those changes to the article, or they may be reverted by any other editor.

You just got off a 24-hour block, and the first thing you do is leave a note here accusing another editor with the words, "You block me because you hate that I change the article", then you make substantial changes to the lede, without consulting other editors. That's not a good start, and doesn't bode well for your continuing to edit WP. Continue with this behavior, and you will very likely be blocked indefinitely. Carlstak (talk) 14:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change the installments with one L to two, second paragraph last sentence: "He played the mutant Beast (Hank McCoy) in the 2011 superhero film X-Men: First Class, a role he reprised in later instalments of the film series." Carbonear-Trinity-Bay de Verde (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: This is correct for British English, which is used for this article. RudolfRed (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]