This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This page should not be speedily deleted because... it is an annual tradition to start a new list of the #1 films in America.
Back on March 8, 2016 [1], I reverted your edit because the information you were adding to the article was incorrect. Deadpool actually became the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016 on its 2nd "day" of release and not its 3rd weekend. I tried to explain this to you on your talk page with no resolution, just a "Regardless of what point" statement from you, meaning to me, that you, or User:Fruitloop11 (who started disputing on your behave), didn't care that where your information was entered into this chart made your statement untrue, instead of just moving your statement into the chart where it would be a true statement. User:PabloBeal rephrased your edit [2], stating that during the 9th weekend of the year, Deadpool became the third highest R-rated film of all-time, which was a true statement. On March 29th, during the 14th week of 2016, Deadpool became 2nd highest grossing R-rated film of all time. I have entered this information and edited previous statements within the chart. Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 10:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
User:PabloBeal rephrased your edit [2], stating that during the 9th weekend of the year, Deadpool became the third highest R-rated film of all-time, which was a true statement. So then there was no point in removing that statement, which you did so anyways.-- Fruitloop11 ( talk) 10:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
You should give you opinion on my proposal, because we started this over where Deadpool being the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016 should go.-- Fruitloop11 ( talk) 10:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Guys, the Full Protection on the article is scheduled to last for 1 week - but it can last as long as it needs to. More likely, we'll just start with topic bans until enough people have been barred from editing this article to allow it to settle down. Just FYI. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 12:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would respectfully like to see an edit for the Note "During the week, Deadpool becomes second highest grossing R-rated film of all-time ($355.1 million) behind The Passion of the Christ ($370.7 million)" as it should be "became the second highest grossing" and has no final period. PabloBeal ( talk) 00:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
This dispute about Deadpool is both trivial and absurd and those who have butted heads here should rethink their entire approach to Wikipedia editing. Simply put, Wikipedia summarizes what reliable sources say about the topic. So, which reliable source says that this film became the highest R-rated film of 2016 on its 2nd day of release? Conversely, where is the reliable source that says it reached that milestone on its 3rd weekend? Bring forth the reliable sources, summarize them accurately, add them to the article, and the dispute disappears. If reliable sources do not discuss this point, then the trivial factoid does not belong in the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A&ofan75 ( talk) 02:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
WP states here that "In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit." A proposal was made by User talk:Fruitloop for a chart at the bottom of this article that states highest grossing films by rating. I disagreed with the proposal, my opinion being it's redundant as there is already a highest films of the year chart on this page, that lists the films that will appear in this newly proposed chart. No other WP users weighed in on the proposal, so a consensus was never reached. Therefore, per WP:Consensus policy, "a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit." That means, to me, no new chart. Maybe the administrator can clarify this issue for me. Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 16:27, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I think this is just another attempt from you to stop me from making contributes to this article. It's a shame I have to put up with this Harrassment over my edits. I left your edits alone why can't you leave mine alone? Also when the administrator watching over this said So I ask again, what problems are there with the proposed alternative from Fruitloop, other than the fact that it's not yours? He was right you are willing to go through anything to stop me from editing I'm willing to bet you would continue to do this for months If you have the chance. -- Fruitloop11 ( talk) 16:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
User talk:Tahc, I have reverted your BOLD edit to the article List of 2016 box office number-one films in the United States in order to start a discussion of why you may think these charts should be rearranged and to have other editors ( User talk:PabloBeal, User talk:And1987, User talk:A&ofan75, etc) to give their opinion on your edit per Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. I would first like to express that, besides the highest grossing ratings chart at the bottom of the page, I think there wasn't anything wrong with the way this article was formatted as it is formatted like the other Box Office Number 1 films articles here on WP. I also notice that this looks like your first time editing this page or one like it. I would ask why did you choose this year's article and not any of the other 40 or so year's article to rearrange? You and other editors are welcome to discuss your edits here and see if we can come to a consensus Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 21:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC).
@ Tahc: 1) Never stated I "owned" any article on WP... that was the other editor's opinion. I can also edit the article and revert edits I think we're unnecessary. 2) In my edit summary when I reverted what I thought was your unnecessary edits, I added a link to WP:BRD as well as a link directly to this talk page discussion. You were first notified when I reverted your edits and when I mentioned you at the beginning of this discussion. I know I get a notification when I am reverted and mentioned in a conversation. 3) I stated in that before mention discussion you were mentioned in, that I saw nothing wrong with the way the charts "were" formatted before you changed them (i.e. discussion heading says "Rearranging the charts"). 4) The title of this article is "List of 2016 box office number one films in the United States." The first chart did not have to be labeled because it is the chart that lists the "2016 box office number one films in the United States." 5) This chart, in my opinion, should remain first on the article since users coming to a page named "List of 2016 box office number one films in the United States" might first want to see the chart that lists the 2016 box office number one films in the United States. The second chart on the page was "Highest grossing films of 2016", which was already labeled as such.
6) And if you read the other discussions on this talk page, I am attempting to remove the chart at the bottom of this article's page because I feel it's redundant to list highest grossing films by rating when there is already a highest grossing film chart on the page. Therefore, I was stating I agreed with how the page was formatted before the chart at the bottom of the page was added and you made your edits. Now, per WP:BRD, "If your bold edit was reverted, then do not re-revert to your version. If your reversion was reverted, then do not re-revert to your version. If you re-revert, then you are no longer following BRD." I am returning the article to the way it was formatted before your first BOLD edit until after this discussion is concluded and a consensus is met. Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 05:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
During this week, or the next week, I think it'll be good information to say that Zootopia will become the tenth animated film to gross over $300 million in the domestic box office. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.174.134.180 ( talk) 16:53, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Should we put that in on when The Boss won the weekend, or the place when The Jungle Book will win? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 ( talk) 16:20, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This page should not be speedily deleted because... it is an annual tradition to start a new list of the #1 films in America.
Back on March 8, 2016 [1], I reverted your edit because the information you were adding to the article was incorrect. Deadpool actually became the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016 on its 2nd "day" of release and not its 3rd weekend. I tried to explain this to you on your talk page with no resolution, just a "Regardless of what point" statement from you, meaning to me, that you, or User:Fruitloop11 (who started disputing on your behave), didn't care that where your information was entered into this chart made your statement untrue, instead of just moving your statement into the chart where it would be a true statement. User:PabloBeal rephrased your edit [2], stating that during the 9th weekend of the year, Deadpool became the third highest R-rated film of all-time, which was a true statement. On March 29th, during the 14th week of 2016, Deadpool became 2nd highest grossing R-rated film of all time. I have entered this information and edited previous statements within the chart. Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 10:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
User:PabloBeal rephrased your edit [2], stating that during the 9th weekend of the year, Deadpool became the third highest R-rated film of all-time, which was a true statement. So then there was no point in removing that statement, which you did so anyways.-- Fruitloop11 ( talk) 10:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
You should give you opinion on my proposal, because we started this over where Deadpool being the highest grossing R-rated film of 2016 should go.-- Fruitloop11 ( talk) 10:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Guys, the Full Protection on the article is scheduled to last for 1 week - but it can last as long as it needs to. More likely, we'll just start with topic bans until enough people have been barred from editing this article to allow it to settle down. Just FYI. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 12:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would respectfully like to see an edit for the Note "During the week, Deadpool becomes second highest grossing R-rated film of all-time ($355.1 million) behind The Passion of the Christ ($370.7 million)" as it should be "became the second highest grossing" and has no final period. PabloBeal ( talk) 00:00, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
This dispute about Deadpool is both trivial and absurd and those who have butted heads here should rethink their entire approach to Wikipedia editing. Simply put, Wikipedia summarizes what reliable sources say about the topic. So, which reliable source says that this film became the highest R-rated film of 2016 on its 2nd day of release? Conversely, where is the reliable source that says it reached that milestone on its 3rd weekend? Bring forth the reliable sources, summarize them accurately, add them to the article, and the dispute disappears. If reliable sources do not discuss this point, then the trivial factoid does not belong in the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A&ofan75 ( talk) 02:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
WP states here that "In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit." A proposal was made by User talk:Fruitloop for a chart at the bottom of this article that states highest grossing films by rating. I disagreed with the proposal, my opinion being it's redundant as there is already a highest films of the year chart on this page, that lists the films that will appear in this newly proposed chart. No other WP users weighed in on the proposal, so a consensus was never reached. Therefore, per WP:Consensus policy, "a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit." That means, to me, no new chart. Maybe the administrator can clarify this issue for me. Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 16:27, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I think this is just another attempt from you to stop me from making contributes to this article. It's a shame I have to put up with this Harrassment over my edits. I left your edits alone why can't you leave mine alone? Also when the administrator watching over this said So I ask again, what problems are there with the proposed alternative from Fruitloop, other than the fact that it's not yours? He was right you are willing to go through anything to stop me from editing I'm willing to bet you would continue to do this for months If you have the chance. -- Fruitloop11 ( talk) 16:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
User talk:Tahc, I have reverted your BOLD edit to the article List of 2016 box office number-one films in the United States in order to start a discussion of why you may think these charts should be rearranged and to have other editors ( User talk:PabloBeal, User talk:And1987, User talk:A&ofan75, etc) to give their opinion on your edit per Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. I would first like to express that, besides the highest grossing ratings chart at the bottom of the page, I think there wasn't anything wrong with the way this article was formatted as it is formatted like the other Box Office Number 1 films articles here on WP. I also notice that this looks like your first time editing this page or one like it. I would ask why did you choose this year's article and not any of the other 40 or so year's article to rearrange? You and other editors are welcome to discuss your edits here and see if we can come to a consensus Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 21:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC).
@ Tahc: 1) Never stated I "owned" any article on WP... that was the other editor's opinion. I can also edit the article and revert edits I think we're unnecessary. 2) In my edit summary when I reverted what I thought was your unnecessary edits, I added a link to WP:BRD as well as a link directly to this talk page discussion. You were first notified when I reverted your edits and when I mentioned you at the beginning of this discussion. I know I get a notification when I am reverted and mentioned in a conversation. 3) I stated in that before mention discussion you were mentioned in, that I saw nothing wrong with the way the charts "were" formatted before you changed them (i.e. discussion heading says "Rearranging the charts"). 4) The title of this article is "List of 2016 box office number one films in the United States." The first chart did not have to be labeled because it is the chart that lists the "2016 box office number one films in the United States." 5) This chart, in my opinion, should remain first on the article since users coming to a page named "List of 2016 box office number one films in the United States" might first want to see the chart that lists the 2016 box office number one films in the United States. The second chart on the page was "Highest grossing films of 2016", which was already labeled as such.
6) And if you read the other discussions on this talk page, I am attempting to remove the chart at the bottom of this article's page because I feel it's redundant to list highest grossing films by rating when there is already a highest grossing film chart on the page. Therefore, I was stating I agreed with how the page was formatted before the chart at the bottom of the page was added and you made your edits. Now, per WP:BRD, "If your bold edit was reverted, then do not re-revert to your version. If your reversion was reverted, then do not re-revert to your version. If you re-revert, then you are no longer following BRD." I am returning the article to the way it was formatted before your first BOLD edit until after this discussion is concluded and a consensus is met. Thank you. HENDAWG229 ( talk) 05:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
During this week, or the next week, I think it'll be good information to say that Zootopia will become the tenth animated film to gross over $300 million in the domestic box office. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.174.134.180 ( talk) 16:53, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Should we put that in on when The Boss won the weekend, or the place when The Jungle Book will win? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 ( talk) 16:20, 16 April 2016 (UTC)