![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Please update even date of the releasing movie 2402:3A80:1EE1:F473:0:0:21D6:FBA3 ( talk) 15:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I see your point that critics is the rotten tomatoes default, but imo this (Discovery season 4) is an unusual case, because it has very few critic reviews, and the audience score for the show is truly abysmal. Anyone who actually looks up the underlying rotten tomatoes will see that, but it seems worthy of note to me on the wikipedia (which otherwise gives the misleading impression that it has been an unqualified success). But I will defer to your extensive experience with movie and series review pages. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:184:4A7F:D451:393D:9DD:5ED:7BB7 ( talk) 20:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
FYI. InedibleHulk ( talk) 05:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Adam. It is nice to meet you. I noticed you are an active Wikipedian and a participant in WP:TELEVISION. As Marcus Lemonis is a television personality and host of a T.V. show, I am hoping you can help. I recently posted a request at Talk:Marcus Lemonis to address concerns about a reoccurring issue of WP:UNDUE and to add some new content to the article. I would be grateful for your assistance and intervention. StephanieAtMarcusLemonis ( talk) 20:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
The Scandinavian countries are not specific countries, it's a pretty big part of Europe covering several countries. Also, the launch of Paramount+ there is special, since it doesn't have the rights to show Star Trek, this was s workaround since Netflix has the rights in this area. Their for it doesn't have season 1-3 or any other star trek either. The coverage of Paramount+ earlier is not sufficient.
I hope you understand I will redo my edit. RobertoDenmark ( talk) 16:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Star Trek: Section 31 (TV series), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
The primary location was Camden Town, along the canal, by the market, and the main roads. Except for the brief establishing shot on Cromwell Road it is difficult to recognise any other London location which makes the reference to the Camden location important for non-UK readers. - - AlisonW ( talk) 21:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
You are one person fighting with multiple people on articles. I suggest you stop telling others what is notable. Not every movie becomes No. 1. That fact that it was in top 5 is notable. AbsolutelyFiring ( talk) 09:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Nightwatch".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Silk".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Silver Sable".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
can you edit Draft:Bruce Wayne (Arkham series character) please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Blackknight1234567890 ( talk • contribs) 1:15, February 26, 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Spider-Women".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Adamstom.97, please check the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. talk page. I have created a discussion. - KingKlaus07 ( talk) 11:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
hello dear, why you revert my edit on List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films,... I add many actors who act in many films in the 3 phase, please advice -- أحمد محمد بسيوني ( talk) 11:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
have appeared in the billing block for at least three filmsare listed. Please see this page for a detailed explanation. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 17:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
In a recent edit summary you wrote: "In writing credits, "and" and "&" mean two different things and should not be arbitrarily changed." What is the difference and where is this explained in Wikipedia guidelines? Debresser ( talk) 02:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Howdy. I see that you made this revert. I don't think that's correct. There is no such verb "executive produces". It is not even grammatical. It should be "executively produces", as it needs to be an adverb characterizing a verb, and not an adjective. But nobody talks that way.
Here's what a Google search for 'executive produce' returns.
You can respond here, I will watch this page. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 21:41, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
The name field is a deprecated field in Template:Infobox television in that the name field used is handled by the name of the article. So currently it is sitting in a maintenance category, Category:Pages using infobox television with non-matching title, in which it states "The value includes an alternative title. Move the alternative title to |alt_name=." which is want I was doing and it kept Deadpool: The Animated Series in the infobox below the title while having the title match the name of the article.
If the name of the series was going to be Deadpool: The Animated Series and not an alternative title as your first reversion summary stated, then if sources show this, then you should start a WP:RM to try and get it moved since it might prove controversial. Or if Deadpool is the common name from the sources as your second reversion summary stated, then the article should not be moved and the alt_name field should be used for Deadpool: The Animated Series as my edit suggested. Aspects ( talk) 04:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
You keep reverting any changes I make it to The Suicide Squad article and seem to act as if you have ownership. Next revert will be a complain to the admins, discuss your issues first. AbsolutelyFiring ( talk) 03:54, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
AbsolutelyFiring (
talk)
05:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Star Trek Discovery title card.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Star Trek Strange New Worlds logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Why is ComicBook.com not a reliable source? Is it like a situational thing when its reliable? I'm really just asking because I've used that source a lot and don't want to be putting a non reliable source in articles. ― Kaleeb18 TalkCaleb 23:09, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, we've definitely had some mixed editing today with EW citations being either web or magazine citations since the citation bot converts all of them to magazines. I don't know if you saw what @ Trailblazer101: said when he reverted some of the phase 4 articles back to magazines earlier or not, but in case you didn't, here's a quote from the edit summmary: "we can use cite mag as these are websites for the magazines, and it's still formatted and displayed the same. Citation bot is generally acceptable in updating the ref formats of MCU articles".
If you still feel like we shouldn't use the magazine citations, that's fine. Figured I'd show you this because I'm trying to get a consensus of what to do since it's gone back and forth today. -- Zoo ( talk) 05:16, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar |
You do an excellent job of adding sources and integrating new content into existing articles, editing what's already there, and creating new articles and drafts, and keeping the drafts updated. I know we've had a few disagreements, but those have few and far between, and have no influence on my respect and appreciation of the quality your work on Wikipedia. BilCat ( talk) 22:08, 4 May 2022 (UTC) |
Wanted to leave a little message to say it's nice to speak with you again! You reviewed and passed The View (talk show) when I nominated it as a GA years ago, which I appreciated very much. KyleJoan talk 02:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey, Adam. Wanted to ask a quick question related to your appreciated contributions to Spider-Man film articles + SSU. What's your general opinion on the SSU's movies? I found Venom to be pretty medicore after watching it last October, Venom: Let There Be Carnage was pretty funny and atleast had some good scenes, and am planning to check if Morbius is truly peak cinema.
Were you also c/e-ing the TFATWS articles in anticipation for a possible GA nomination? And in the future, would LTBC and NWH become GAs? Thanks. – SirDot ( talk) 12:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey @ Adamstom.97. I noticed that you were interested in promoting FATWS to a good article. I found some links which provides some more info about production which you could add into the article. I hope this helps.
https://www.indiewire.com/2021/05/the-falcon-and-the-winter-soldier-marvel-disney-1234635597/
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/falcon-winter-soldier-zemo-endgame-1234964228/ Dcdiehardfan ( talk) 03:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Pilot (The Gifted) and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 20#Pilot (The Gifted) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
eviolite
(talk)
23:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
![]()
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. ( t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC) |
My bad, I only glanced over the article. (I seem to have been mislead by some news outlet headlines about the exact nature of the continuity as well.) ★Trekker ( talk) 13:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
Just wanted to pass along an appreciation for all the work you do on MCU and Star Wars article. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 17:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC) |
Can I ask what kind of device you edit on? In this revert, and the identical one after, you complained that the edit created "heaps of unnecessary whitespace". On a smartphone, which a large number of WP editors and readers use, the section now looks terrible. I can only imagine you use a differnt device, such as a desktop, where this isn't readily obvious to you.
The first "column" (starring) is shoved to the left. The next col, (recurring) is shoved to the right, but doesn't begin until after the first col ends. (As if a {{clear}} template was used). The third col is also shoved to the left, but again doesn't start until after the second col ends. This creates a huge gap (or whitespace) on the left, between the first and third cols, and gaps above and below the second col on the right, equal to the first and third cols. It's a bizarre look, and must certinaly be unintended. Add to that the lettering is reduced in size by almost half, making reading all the more difficult.
With the col formatting removed, the three lists become a single, linear list that completely fills the page, (iow, no whitespace at all), and the lettering is full size, like the rest of the prose. If you have a smartphone, perhaps you could take another look on it, and then reconsider your reverts. I didn't remove the cols just for shits and giggles, it was an obvious improvement. - wolf 22:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
It's obviously not adult content, apparently you need to be logged in to view Flickr accounts(?). So here is the image on Imgur. Anyway, even if there is some whitespace to the right when cols aren't used, I think that is preferrable to the way it appears now. Don't the majority of users access WP via smartphones now? So, between a layout that looks terrible to the majority vs some whitespace along the right for a minority of viewers (which is not as bad, numerous articles have whitespace on the right for various reasons), is there really a debate? - wolf 03:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
"Regardless, my talk page is definitely not the place for this discussion to continue, either you need to get consensus at The Mandalorian articles to remove the columns (which I and others would definitely disagree with) or you need to go to the template talk page and explain that on the type of phone you have, desktop mode is showing two columns and you think it should be one. - adamstom97 21:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
" - that is awesome collaboration. Thanks, and have a great day. -
wolf
22:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello there!
I just wanted to say thanks for your work on the Young Jedi Adventures draft, you've really made it amazing. I was at Celebration myself for the last couple of days, so I didn't have time to work on it, but even if I had - your writing is vastly superior to mine. I dunno how to give out a barnstar. But I'd give one to you.
MYFBWYA, AdmiralAckbar1977 ( talk) 00:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
The article
Star Trek: Discovery (season 3) you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Star Trek: Discovery (season 3) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
ArcticSeeress --
ArcticSeeress (
talk)
23:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Hope you enjoyed your vacation/break! — SirDot ( talk) 10:38, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
User Adamstom, I want to apologize to you for my mistake on a possible edit war and I edit too fast and a possible 3RR. I don't want to go too far on a 3RR. I let go immediately. I will stop this instant. I will apologize to you. If you can accept my apology, we will move on. I hope you will accept my apology for its edit mistakes. I will be careful not to edit war next time OK? Thanks. Talk to you later. 24.80.117.27 ( talk) 02:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Please see MOS:TVPLOT, that such a section may be called "Plot" or "Premise" or "Overview", and there is nothing there preferring one over the other, in name or content. Debresser ( talk) 21:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Editor edit warring, again...What? Where did that come from?). Please self-revert. - adamstom97 ( talk) 22:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Before calling me a " racist troll", you should take the time to read the source you censor...Because you do not agree with a point of view does not mean the opposite way of thinking is automatically "racist"...
Many critics are based on the necessity to respect Tolkien's intent such as this one :"Tolkien’s aim in writing Lord of the Rings was not to create some feel-good hero story about good triumphing over evil. He spent his life studying linguistics and the medieval folklore of the British Isles. He lamented the fact that true British history and folklore were lost in the Norman invasion of Britain. Tolkien admired the grand mythologies of the Nordic peoples and the Greeks. He mourned the loss of true British history, and through his love of myth and language, tried to create a mythology that was unique to the British Isles. Hence, the birth of the stories of Middle Earth. While we may all be more familiar with The Lord of the Rings, that story is just one small part of an expansive world and mythology that Tolkien spent his life creating.So, shoving the modern view of diversity into a pre-Anglo-Saxon mythological England makes little to no sense. On the one hand, it’s a slap in the face of Tolkien’s ultimate goal of creating this world and its stories. On the other hand, studios are still refusing to write interesting stories for non-white characters." https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/amazons-the-rings-of-power-series-is-a-crime-against-the-fantasy-genre
-- Flying Tiger ( talk) 23:40, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
I have noted an ongoing edit war among three primary people on The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. I am leaving the same final warning message for all three of you. All three of you have previously been blocked for edit warring in the past. Yet, the lesson does not seem to have been learned. Edit warring is not a means to an end. It's counterproductive and disruptive. This behavior is entirely unacceptable. It will stop. If you are not able to stop your edit warring, you will find yourself the recipient of a considerably longer block. It's your choice. You can either comply with our Wikipedia:Edit warring policy and continue editing, or not comply and not be able to edit. Your choice. By all means continue the discussion at Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_Rings_of_Power#Removal_of_Non-reliable_sourcing, and attempt to come to a consensus. If you can't come to a consensus, the appropriate response is NOT to edit war in a vain attempt to brute force your preferred version of the article into existence. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and follow it. You will note that policy does NOT suggest edit warring. This ends. Now. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 02:57, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. This is partial block and applies only to The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. You were previously given a final warning regarding this behavior yet persist in continuing it. It doesn't matter if you think you're right and the other person is wrong. There is no deadline to get something right. Continue the discussion at the talk page. If that doesn't bring satisfaction, then continue with Wikipedia:Dispute resolution as I advised you to do before. This was the absolute minimum block I felt I could give. You should be well advised to strongly reconsider your actions moving forward. Edit warring is NEVER a means to an end. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 22:51, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Adamstom.97 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Per my response above, the previous warning for edit warring was justified but this subsequent ban was for separate edits that were WP:NOT3RR. I was removing clear vandalism from an IP editor who is ignoring discussion. - adamstom97 ( talk) 23:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
There appears to be disagreement here. The warning remains, but the partial block is removed. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 00:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
For whoever reviews my unblock request, the "racist agenda" that I referred to above can be seen at Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power#Bias of the article against critics of the production and Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power#Regarding the Section titled 'Reception'. I'm not saying that the IP added clearly racist wording to the article, but what they added is what the racists want to be added. There are also previous discussions for this stuff in the talk archive, and another editor had actually suggested we get the page protected preemptively to avoid this sort of thing but that isn't really how it works.
I have been editing Wikipedia long enough to know that edit warring is wrong, but also that it happens sometimes. It's often just a couple passionate editors who get away from themselves and need to take a deep breath, which is exactly what happened with the dispute that Hammersoft had warned me about before (by the time they warned myself and the other participants, the edit warring had stopped and we were discussing the issue at the talk page). That is not what happened this time. An IP editor who could not be reasoned with at the talk page was repeatedly adding vandalism to the article. Unfortunately this is very common for film and TV articles, which is where I mainly edit on Wikipedia, and any editor who regular works on these sorts of articles will tell you that we have to deal with this many times every day. I reverted the IP's changes twice, gave clear and calm explanations at the talk page, and requested page protection. I don't think it is fair to call that edit warring, or to block me for it. - adamstom97 ( talk) 23:43, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Even if you are certain it was vandalism, there are other people who can handle it.Since when has Wikipedia's policy been that we should ignore certain vandalism in the hopes that someone else will remove it? Blocking someone from editing an article based on that logic is ridiculous. - adamstom97 ( talk) 00:01, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Morbius was the first movie kicking off the “Morbius Saga” which we have little to none information on right now. Expect to see more movies like “Avengers: The Morb Dynasty” and “Avengers: Morb Wars”This is about as obvious as vandalism gets, any attempt to defend this addition would be laughable. The fact that you don't see this as vandalism proves my point: you clearly must not know about the Morbius memes and jokes that are all over certain parts of the internet which have inspired this, but anyone who does can tell you that this is blatant vandalism (especially at a completely unrelated article, Loki (season 2) has nothing to do with Morbius let alone fake future movies inspired by the recently announced Avengers films). Once again your lack of understanding of the topic means you don't see what is actually going on here, which isn't your fault but you shouldn't be making decisions such as who gets blocked based on something that you don't know anything about. - adamstom97 ( talk) 00:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok fine. I've unblocked. But, let me be unequivocally clear. Adamstom.97, you have engaged in a pattern of edit warring. You yourself have acknowledged this [4]. We're going to have to agree to disagree that your subsequent actions on the article did or did not constitute edit warring. But, if your edit warring continues, there will be consequences. I've attempted, and failed, to bring home the seriousness of your actions and disregard for communicating with the IP you claim was vandalizing. I won't be blocking you again. But, if the pattern continues I will be recommending a block. I have been attempting (and failing) to reason with you about how you are violating policy. Maybe that's on me, maybe that's on you. Regardless, the point remains. Your self-acknowledged edit warring is out of line and can not be accepted. This behavior must stop. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 00:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to apologise for the messages I left on your talk page, particularly how it was put in the second one. Over the last few days, when I've heard some of the words I used come up, it's just really made me feel bad for saying it, regardless of the reasons I had, at the time. I don't necessarily expect you to accept my apology, but I'd just like to have it known; it's taken this long because I've just been avoiding Wikipedia, for a few days.
However, I'd like it to be clear, I don't regret adding the average Discovery TV ratings, I still think the viewership section is the right place for it, and I also don't think your eagerness to repeatedly revert it without a full discussion was right. Once again, I apologise for the messages, and how I left them, because they made the issue attacks on character, which stops it from being anything else, and it shouldn't be. -- Bacon Noodles ( talk • contribs • uploads) 06:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Adam. Me and Zoo have spent a bit under 2 months working on c/e-ing, ref organizing the MCU Spider-Man page in preparation for a GAN. Since you've done multiple GA reviews in the past, could you review it once you've the time? (You're working on SDCC updates and replying on multiple discussions, don't want to disturb you) — SirDot ( talk) 10:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tolkien Barnstar | |
Thank you for your diligence and integrity in persistently defending The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power from all manner of difficult users. "Deeds will not be less valiant because they are unpraised," but in this case, you also deserve the praise. TNstingray ( talk) 14:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC) |
How you can say it is not neutral? if the dialogues are biased and not represent the narrative of the region in series that is specifically made to for the region representation with actors also from there, then obviously the audience and publications from that region will react negatively on it. 39.34.174.39 ( talk)
Okay, here's something weird I'm confused about. In the source code for Across the Spider-Verse, it is:
'''''Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse''''' is an upcoming American [[computer-animated]] [[superhero film]] featuring the [[Marvel Comics]] character [[Miles Morales|Miles Morales / Spider-Man]], produced by [[Columbia Pictures]] and [[Sony Pictures Animation]] in association with [[Marvel Entertainment|Marvel]]. Distributed by [[Sony Pictures Releasing]], it is a sequel to ''[[Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse]]'' (2018) and is set in a shared [[Multiverse (Marvel Comics)|multiverse]] of [[Parallel universes in fiction|alternate universes]] called the "[[Spider-Verse]]". The film is directed by [[Joaquim Dos Santos]], [[Kemp Powers]], and Justin K. Thompson from a screenplay by [[Phil Lord and Christopher Miller|Phil Lord, Christopher Miller]], and [[David Callaham]]. [[Shameik Moore]] voices [[Miles Morales (Spider-Verse)|Gwen Stacy / Spider-Woman]]. The film was officially announced in November 2019 and animation work began in June 2020, with a different visual style for each of the six universes visited by the characters. ''Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse'' is scheduled to be released in the United States on June 2, 2023, delayed from an initial April 2022 date due to the [[COVID-19 pandemic]]. A third film, ''Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse'', is set to be released in March 2024. A female-focused spin-off film is also in development.
However, I only see it as only 2 paragraphs:
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is an upcoming American computer-animated superhero film featuring the Marvel Comics character Miles Morales / Spider-Man, produced by Columbia Pictures and Sony Pictures Animation in association with Marvel. Distributed by Sony Pictures Releasing, it is a sequel to Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) and is set in a shared multiverse of alternate universes called the "Spider-Verse". The film is directed by Joaquim Dos Santos, Kemp Powers, and Justin K. Thompson from a screenplay by Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, and David Callaham. Shameik Moore voices Miles Morales / Spider-Man. The film was officially announced in November 2019 and animation work began in June 2020, with a different visual style for each of the six universes visited by the characters. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is scheduled to be released in the United States on June 2, 2023, delayed from an initial April 2022 date due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A third film, Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse, is set to be released in March 2024. A female-focused spin-off film is also in development.
I looked through the history and it looks like it was done by me? It's not in any diff. My theory it was inspect-elemented, the reason there is no changes in the source code but a change visually. — SirDot ( talk) 20:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
I just wanted to drop you a line to apologize for my hasty meddling with the Rings of Power article. I can see from the page's statistics that you've put a tremendous amount of time and effort into it, and it was silly of me to think that the few casual changes that I ventured might improve it. Good luck with the additions that you'll no doubt be making to it in the coming months and years—it'll probably end up as a kind of Wikipedian Everest (or should I say Taniquetil?) as extraordinary as the show itself! Niggle1892 ( talk) 06:03, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
You swapped a The Beat source (on the Harvey Awards nominations) for a GamesRadar+ source on the Ms. Marvel (TV series) article. Just wanted to flag that The Beat (www.comicsbeat.com) (run by Heidi MacDonald) is considered a reliable source per Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/References. In terms of comics news, I would consider both sources about equal. I'm not sure if the MCU project is developing its own list of reliable sources or not. Sariel Xilo ( talk) 17:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
I would like to know why you feel it is appropriate to use reflinks named <ref name="RacistBacklashDoG">, <ref name="RacistBacklashTheGamer">, <ref name="RacistBacklashConversation">, and <ref name="RacistBacklash/Film"> to describe valid if politically incorrect criticism of unconventional casting. I have searched online as best I can and am unable to find any actual evidence of racist language used by critics of said casting although certain left-wing sources (The Daily Beast, Time Magazine) described such criticism as racist but, sadly, we live in an age when any criticism of certain sacred cows is automatically (reactionarily?) described as racist, sexist, homophobic (largely in abeyance, in favor of "transphobic"), etc. in certain political environments and media fora. As you are in New Zealand, on he ground so to speak in terms of actual filming, perhaps you could unearth at least some of the alleged actual racist backlash showing actual racist language used firsthand. You are far younger than I am and doubtless more adept in cyberspace. I may not be looking in the right places for this material. I would appreciate it. Thanks. MurrayGreshler ( talk) 18:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
valid if politically incorrect criticism of unconventional casting). - adamstom97 ( talk) 20:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Your removal of the template from Star Trek: Discovery was hasty, and not justified by any of the nine reasons listed in WP:WTRMT. I have little interest in a revert war, but I must note my disappointment with your actions in this instance, your edit summary was provocative and not up to the standard of WP:ESDOS - specifically "Don't make snide comments." The issues with the lead were clearly documented in the addition of the template and remain. That an issue 'has always been like that' is not a valid justification for removing the template when you did - the issues relating to lack of clarity, confused paragraphing, and duplication of information have not been resolved at all. H. Carver ( talk) 22:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding this, RT is not hiding any score. They accidentally added two reviews as season reviews, both rated 3.5/5 (7/10), therefore the average score was shown as 7/10 for a while. The scores of the episode reviews do not affect the overall average for now. ภץאคгöร 13:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Just to tell you (and probably remind you, it's been 3 weeks), I've begun work (the IRL stuff has been sorted out) on restructuring and adding new content/removing old content for the MCU Spidey article, to get it to GA status. — SirDot ( talk) 09:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
It appears that the upcoming TV show does indeed have Star Wars preceding the title. Per this article [5]. I was wondering if you could help with the move (back) to the proper name. As it will not let me.
Thank you, AdmiralAckbar1977 ( talk) 01:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
InfiniteNexus (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas!
This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Merry Christmas, Adamstom.97! Have a quantumanic new year! InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
— El Millo ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
— El Millo ( talk) 07:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Trailblazer101 ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Trailblazer101 ( talk) 16:48, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2023! |
Hello Adamstom.97, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2023. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
JOE BRO 64 14:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:What If... Captain Carter Fought the Hydra Stomper?, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Adamstom.97,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
17:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Please update even date of the releasing movie 2402:3A80:1EE1:F473:0:0:21D6:FBA3 ( talk) 15:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I see your point that critics is the rotten tomatoes default, but imo this (Discovery season 4) is an unusual case, because it has very few critic reviews, and the audience score for the show is truly abysmal. Anyone who actually looks up the underlying rotten tomatoes will see that, but it seems worthy of note to me on the wikipedia (which otherwise gives the misleading impression that it has been an unqualified success). But I will defer to your extensive experience with movie and series review pages. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:184:4A7F:D451:393D:9DD:5ED:7BB7 ( talk) 20:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
FYI. InedibleHulk ( talk) 05:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Adam. It is nice to meet you. I noticed you are an active Wikipedian and a participant in WP:TELEVISION. As Marcus Lemonis is a television personality and host of a T.V. show, I am hoping you can help. I recently posted a request at Talk:Marcus Lemonis to address concerns about a reoccurring issue of WP:UNDUE and to add some new content to the article. I would be grateful for your assistance and intervention. StephanieAtMarcusLemonis ( talk) 20:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
The Scandinavian countries are not specific countries, it's a pretty big part of Europe covering several countries. Also, the launch of Paramount+ there is special, since it doesn't have the rights to show Star Trek, this was s workaround since Netflix has the rights in this area. Their for it doesn't have season 1-3 or any other star trek either. The coverage of Paramount+ earlier is not sufficient.
I hope you understand I will redo my edit. RobertoDenmark ( talk) 16:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Star Trek: Section 31 (TV series), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
The primary location was Camden Town, along the canal, by the market, and the main roads. Except for the brief establishing shot on Cromwell Road it is difficult to recognise any other London location which makes the reference to the Camden location important for non-UK readers. - - AlisonW ( talk) 21:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
You are one person fighting with multiple people on articles. I suggest you stop telling others what is notable. Not every movie becomes No. 1. That fact that it was in top 5 is notable. AbsolutelyFiring ( talk) 09:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Nightwatch".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Silk".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Silver Sable".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
can you edit Draft:Bruce Wayne (Arkham series character) please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Blackknight1234567890 ( talk • contribs) 1:15, February 26, 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Spider-Women".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Adamstom.97, please check the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. talk page. I have created a discussion. - KingKlaus07 ( talk) 11:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
hello dear, why you revert my edit on List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films,... I add many actors who act in many films in the 3 phase, please advice -- أحمد محمد بسيوني ( talk) 11:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
have appeared in the billing block for at least three filmsare listed. Please see this page for a detailed explanation. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 17:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
In a recent edit summary you wrote: "In writing credits, "and" and "&" mean two different things and should not be arbitrarily changed." What is the difference and where is this explained in Wikipedia guidelines? Debresser ( talk) 02:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Howdy. I see that you made this revert. I don't think that's correct. There is no such verb "executive produces". It is not even grammatical. It should be "executively produces", as it needs to be an adverb characterizing a verb, and not an adjective. But nobody talks that way.
Here's what a Google search for 'executive produce' returns.
You can respond here, I will watch this page. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 21:41, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
The name field is a deprecated field in Template:Infobox television in that the name field used is handled by the name of the article. So currently it is sitting in a maintenance category, Category:Pages using infobox television with non-matching title, in which it states "The value includes an alternative title. Move the alternative title to |alt_name=." which is want I was doing and it kept Deadpool: The Animated Series in the infobox below the title while having the title match the name of the article.
If the name of the series was going to be Deadpool: The Animated Series and not an alternative title as your first reversion summary stated, then if sources show this, then you should start a WP:RM to try and get it moved since it might prove controversial. Or if Deadpool is the common name from the sources as your second reversion summary stated, then the article should not be moved and the alt_name field should be used for Deadpool: The Animated Series as my edit suggested. Aspects ( talk) 04:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
You keep reverting any changes I make it to The Suicide Squad article and seem to act as if you have ownership. Next revert will be a complain to the admins, discuss your issues first. AbsolutelyFiring ( talk) 03:54, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. Thank you.
AbsolutelyFiring (
talk)
05:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Star Trek Discovery title card.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Star Trek Strange New Worlds logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Why is ComicBook.com not a reliable source? Is it like a situational thing when its reliable? I'm really just asking because I've used that source a lot and don't want to be putting a non reliable source in articles. ― Kaleeb18 TalkCaleb 23:09, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, we've definitely had some mixed editing today with EW citations being either web or magazine citations since the citation bot converts all of them to magazines. I don't know if you saw what @ Trailblazer101: said when he reverted some of the phase 4 articles back to magazines earlier or not, but in case you didn't, here's a quote from the edit summmary: "we can use cite mag as these are websites for the magazines, and it's still formatted and displayed the same. Citation bot is generally acceptable in updating the ref formats of MCU articles".
If you still feel like we shouldn't use the magazine citations, that's fine. Figured I'd show you this because I'm trying to get a consensus of what to do since it's gone back and forth today. -- Zoo ( talk) 05:16, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar |
You do an excellent job of adding sources and integrating new content into existing articles, editing what's already there, and creating new articles and drafts, and keeping the drafts updated. I know we've had a few disagreements, but those have few and far between, and have no influence on my respect and appreciation of the quality your work on Wikipedia. BilCat ( talk) 22:08, 4 May 2022 (UTC) |
Wanted to leave a little message to say it's nice to speak with you again! You reviewed and passed The View (talk show) when I nominated it as a GA years ago, which I appreciated very much. KyleJoan talk 02:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey, Adam. Wanted to ask a quick question related to your appreciated contributions to Spider-Man film articles + SSU. What's your general opinion on the SSU's movies? I found Venom to be pretty medicore after watching it last October, Venom: Let There Be Carnage was pretty funny and atleast had some good scenes, and am planning to check if Morbius is truly peak cinema.
Were you also c/e-ing the TFATWS articles in anticipation for a possible GA nomination? And in the future, would LTBC and NWH become GAs? Thanks. – SirDot ( talk) 12:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey @ Adamstom.97. I noticed that you were interested in promoting FATWS to a good article. I found some links which provides some more info about production which you could add into the article. I hope this helps.
https://www.indiewire.com/2021/05/the-falcon-and-the-winter-soldier-marvel-disney-1234635597/
https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/falcon-winter-soldier-zemo-endgame-1234964228/ Dcdiehardfan ( talk) 03:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Pilot (The Gifted) and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 20#Pilot (The Gifted) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
eviolite
(talk)
23:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
![]()
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. ( t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC) |
My bad, I only glanced over the article. (I seem to have been mislead by some news outlet headlines about the exact nature of the continuity as well.) ★Trekker ( talk) 13:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
Just wanted to pass along an appreciation for all the work you do on MCU and Star Wars article. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 17:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC) |
Can I ask what kind of device you edit on? In this revert, and the identical one after, you complained that the edit created "heaps of unnecessary whitespace". On a smartphone, which a large number of WP editors and readers use, the section now looks terrible. I can only imagine you use a differnt device, such as a desktop, where this isn't readily obvious to you.
The first "column" (starring) is shoved to the left. The next col, (recurring) is shoved to the right, but doesn't begin until after the first col ends. (As if a {{clear}} template was used). The third col is also shoved to the left, but again doesn't start until after the second col ends. This creates a huge gap (or whitespace) on the left, between the first and third cols, and gaps above and below the second col on the right, equal to the first and third cols. It's a bizarre look, and must certinaly be unintended. Add to that the lettering is reduced in size by almost half, making reading all the more difficult.
With the col formatting removed, the three lists become a single, linear list that completely fills the page, (iow, no whitespace at all), and the lettering is full size, like the rest of the prose. If you have a smartphone, perhaps you could take another look on it, and then reconsider your reverts. I didn't remove the cols just for shits and giggles, it was an obvious improvement. - wolf 22:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
It's obviously not adult content, apparently you need to be logged in to view Flickr accounts(?). So here is the image on Imgur. Anyway, even if there is some whitespace to the right when cols aren't used, I think that is preferrable to the way it appears now. Don't the majority of users access WP via smartphones now? So, between a layout that looks terrible to the majority vs some whitespace along the right for a minority of viewers (which is not as bad, numerous articles have whitespace on the right for various reasons), is there really a debate? - wolf 03:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
"Regardless, my talk page is definitely not the place for this discussion to continue, either you need to get consensus at The Mandalorian articles to remove the columns (which I and others would definitely disagree with) or you need to go to the template talk page and explain that on the type of phone you have, desktop mode is showing two columns and you think it should be one. - adamstom97 21:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
" - that is awesome collaboration. Thanks, and have a great day. -
wolf
22:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello there!
I just wanted to say thanks for your work on the Young Jedi Adventures draft, you've really made it amazing. I was at Celebration myself for the last couple of days, so I didn't have time to work on it, but even if I had - your writing is vastly superior to mine. I dunno how to give out a barnstar. But I'd give one to you.
MYFBWYA, AdmiralAckbar1977 ( talk) 00:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
The article
Star Trek: Discovery (season 3) you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Star Trek: Discovery (season 3) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
ArcticSeeress --
ArcticSeeress (
talk)
23:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Hope you enjoyed your vacation/break! — SirDot ( talk) 10:38, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
User Adamstom, I want to apologize to you for my mistake on a possible edit war and I edit too fast and a possible 3RR. I don't want to go too far on a 3RR. I let go immediately. I will stop this instant. I will apologize to you. If you can accept my apology, we will move on. I hope you will accept my apology for its edit mistakes. I will be careful not to edit war next time OK? Thanks. Talk to you later. 24.80.117.27 ( talk) 02:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Please see MOS:TVPLOT, that such a section may be called "Plot" or "Premise" or "Overview", and there is nothing there preferring one over the other, in name or content. Debresser ( talk) 21:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Editor edit warring, again...What? Where did that come from?). Please self-revert. - adamstom97 ( talk) 22:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Before calling me a " racist troll", you should take the time to read the source you censor...Because you do not agree with a point of view does not mean the opposite way of thinking is automatically "racist"...
Many critics are based on the necessity to respect Tolkien's intent such as this one :"Tolkien’s aim in writing Lord of the Rings was not to create some feel-good hero story about good triumphing over evil. He spent his life studying linguistics and the medieval folklore of the British Isles. He lamented the fact that true British history and folklore were lost in the Norman invasion of Britain. Tolkien admired the grand mythologies of the Nordic peoples and the Greeks. He mourned the loss of true British history, and through his love of myth and language, tried to create a mythology that was unique to the British Isles. Hence, the birth of the stories of Middle Earth. While we may all be more familiar with The Lord of the Rings, that story is just one small part of an expansive world and mythology that Tolkien spent his life creating.So, shoving the modern view of diversity into a pre-Anglo-Saxon mythological England makes little to no sense. On the one hand, it’s a slap in the face of Tolkien’s ultimate goal of creating this world and its stories. On the other hand, studios are still refusing to write interesting stories for non-white characters." https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/amazons-the-rings-of-power-series-is-a-crime-against-the-fantasy-genre
-- Flying Tiger ( talk) 23:40, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
I have noted an ongoing edit war among three primary people on The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. I am leaving the same final warning message for all three of you. All three of you have previously been blocked for edit warring in the past. Yet, the lesson does not seem to have been learned. Edit warring is not a means to an end. It's counterproductive and disruptive. This behavior is entirely unacceptable. It will stop. If you are not able to stop your edit warring, you will find yourself the recipient of a considerably longer block. It's your choice. You can either comply with our Wikipedia:Edit warring policy and continue editing, or not comply and not be able to edit. Your choice. By all means continue the discussion at Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_Rings_of_Power#Removal_of_Non-reliable_sourcing, and attempt to come to a consensus. If you can't come to a consensus, the appropriate response is NOT to edit war in a vain attempt to brute force your preferred version of the article into existence. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and follow it. You will note that policy does NOT suggest edit warring. This ends. Now. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 02:57, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. This is partial block and applies only to The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. You were previously given a final warning regarding this behavior yet persist in continuing it. It doesn't matter if you think you're right and the other person is wrong. There is no deadline to get something right. Continue the discussion at the talk page. If that doesn't bring satisfaction, then continue with Wikipedia:Dispute resolution as I advised you to do before. This was the absolute minimum block I felt I could give. You should be well advised to strongly reconsider your actions moving forward. Edit warring is NEVER a means to an end. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 22:51, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Adamstom.97 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Per my response above, the previous warning for edit warring was justified but this subsequent ban was for separate edits that were WP:NOT3RR. I was removing clear vandalism from an IP editor who is ignoring discussion. - adamstom97 ( talk) 23:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
There appears to be disagreement here. The warning remains, but the partial block is removed. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 00:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
For whoever reviews my unblock request, the "racist agenda" that I referred to above can be seen at Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power#Bias of the article against critics of the production and Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power#Regarding the Section titled 'Reception'. I'm not saying that the IP added clearly racist wording to the article, but what they added is what the racists want to be added. There are also previous discussions for this stuff in the talk archive, and another editor had actually suggested we get the page protected preemptively to avoid this sort of thing but that isn't really how it works.
I have been editing Wikipedia long enough to know that edit warring is wrong, but also that it happens sometimes. It's often just a couple passionate editors who get away from themselves and need to take a deep breath, which is exactly what happened with the dispute that Hammersoft had warned me about before (by the time they warned myself and the other participants, the edit warring had stopped and we were discussing the issue at the talk page). That is not what happened this time. An IP editor who could not be reasoned with at the talk page was repeatedly adding vandalism to the article. Unfortunately this is very common for film and TV articles, which is where I mainly edit on Wikipedia, and any editor who regular works on these sorts of articles will tell you that we have to deal with this many times every day. I reverted the IP's changes twice, gave clear and calm explanations at the talk page, and requested page protection. I don't think it is fair to call that edit warring, or to block me for it. - adamstom97 ( talk) 23:43, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Even if you are certain it was vandalism, there are other people who can handle it.Since when has Wikipedia's policy been that we should ignore certain vandalism in the hopes that someone else will remove it? Blocking someone from editing an article based on that logic is ridiculous. - adamstom97 ( talk) 00:01, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Morbius was the first movie kicking off the “Morbius Saga” which we have little to none information on right now. Expect to see more movies like “Avengers: The Morb Dynasty” and “Avengers: Morb Wars”This is about as obvious as vandalism gets, any attempt to defend this addition would be laughable. The fact that you don't see this as vandalism proves my point: you clearly must not know about the Morbius memes and jokes that are all over certain parts of the internet which have inspired this, but anyone who does can tell you that this is blatant vandalism (especially at a completely unrelated article, Loki (season 2) has nothing to do with Morbius let alone fake future movies inspired by the recently announced Avengers films). Once again your lack of understanding of the topic means you don't see what is actually going on here, which isn't your fault but you shouldn't be making decisions such as who gets blocked based on something that you don't know anything about. - adamstom97 ( talk) 00:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok fine. I've unblocked. But, let me be unequivocally clear. Adamstom.97, you have engaged in a pattern of edit warring. You yourself have acknowledged this [4]. We're going to have to agree to disagree that your subsequent actions on the article did or did not constitute edit warring. But, if your edit warring continues, there will be consequences. I've attempted, and failed, to bring home the seriousness of your actions and disregard for communicating with the IP you claim was vandalizing. I won't be blocking you again. But, if the pattern continues I will be recommending a block. I have been attempting (and failing) to reason with you about how you are violating policy. Maybe that's on me, maybe that's on you. Regardless, the point remains. Your self-acknowledged edit warring is out of line and can not be accepted. This behavior must stop. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 00:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to apologise for the messages I left on your talk page, particularly how it was put in the second one. Over the last few days, when I've heard some of the words I used come up, it's just really made me feel bad for saying it, regardless of the reasons I had, at the time. I don't necessarily expect you to accept my apology, but I'd just like to have it known; it's taken this long because I've just been avoiding Wikipedia, for a few days.
However, I'd like it to be clear, I don't regret adding the average Discovery TV ratings, I still think the viewership section is the right place for it, and I also don't think your eagerness to repeatedly revert it without a full discussion was right. Once again, I apologise for the messages, and how I left them, because they made the issue attacks on character, which stops it from being anything else, and it shouldn't be. -- Bacon Noodles ( talk • contribs • uploads) 06:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Adam. Me and Zoo have spent a bit under 2 months working on c/e-ing, ref organizing the MCU Spider-Man page in preparation for a GAN. Since you've done multiple GA reviews in the past, could you review it once you've the time? (You're working on SDCC updates and replying on multiple discussions, don't want to disturb you) — SirDot ( talk) 10:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tolkien Barnstar | |
Thank you for your diligence and integrity in persistently defending The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power from all manner of difficult users. "Deeds will not be less valiant because they are unpraised," but in this case, you also deserve the praise. TNstingray ( talk) 14:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC) |
How you can say it is not neutral? if the dialogues are biased and not represent the narrative of the region in series that is specifically made to for the region representation with actors also from there, then obviously the audience and publications from that region will react negatively on it. 39.34.174.39 ( talk)
Okay, here's something weird I'm confused about. In the source code for Across the Spider-Verse, it is:
'''''Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse''''' is an upcoming American [[computer-animated]] [[superhero film]] featuring the [[Marvel Comics]] character [[Miles Morales|Miles Morales / Spider-Man]], produced by [[Columbia Pictures]] and [[Sony Pictures Animation]] in association with [[Marvel Entertainment|Marvel]]. Distributed by [[Sony Pictures Releasing]], it is a sequel to ''[[Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse]]'' (2018) and is set in a shared [[Multiverse (Marvel Comics)|multiverse]] of [[Parallel universes in fiction|alternate universes]] called the "[[Spider-Verse]]". The film is directed by [[Joaquim Dos Santos]], [[Kemp Powers]], and Justin K. Thompson from a screenplay by [[Phil Lord and Christopher Miller|Phil Lord, Christopher Miller]], and [[David Callaham]]. [[Shameik Moore]] voices [[Miles Morales (Spider-Verse)|Gwen Stacy / Spider-Woman]]. The film was officially announced in November 2019 and animation work began in June 2020, with a different visual style for each of the six universes visited by the characters. ''Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse'' is scheduled to be released in the United States on June 2, 2023, delayed from an initial April 2022 date due to the [[COVID-19 pandemic]]. A third film, ''Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse'', is set to be released in March 2024. A female-focused spin-off film is also in development.
However, I only see it as only 2 paragraphs:
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is an upcoming American computer-animated superhero film featuring the Marvel Comics character Miles Morales / Spider-Man, produced by Columbia Pictures and Sony Pictures Animation in association with Marvel. Distributed by Sony Pictures Releasing, it is a sequel to Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018) and is set in a shared multiverse of alternate universes called the "Spider-Verse". The film is directed by Joaquim Dos Santos, Kemp Powers, and Justin K. Thompson from a screenplay by Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, and David Callaham. Shameik Moore voices Miles Morales / Spider-Man. The film was officially announced in November 2019 and animation work began in June 2020, with a different visual style for each of the six universes visited by the characters. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is scheduled to be released in the United States on June 2, 2023, delayed from an initial April 2022 date due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A third film, Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse, is set to be released in March 2024. A female-focused spin-off film is also in development.
I looked through the history and it looks like it was done by me? It's not in any diff. My theory it was inspect-elemented, the reason there is no changes in the source code but a change visually. — SirDot ( talk) 20:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
I just wanted to drop you a line to apologize for my hasty meddling with the Rings of Power article. I can see from the page's statistics that you've put a tremendous amount of time and effort into it, and it was silly of me to think that the few casual changes that I ventured might improve it. Good luck with the additions that you'll no doubt be making to it in the coming months and years—it'll probably end up as a kind of Wikipedian Everest (or should I say Taniquetil?) as extraordinary as the show itself! Niggle1892 ( talk) 06:03, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
You swapped a The Beat source (on the Harvey Awards nominations) for a GamesRadar+ source on the Ms. Marvel (TV series) article. Just wanted to flag that The Beat (www.comicsbeat.com) (run by Heidi MacDonald) is considered a reliable source per Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/References. In terms of comics news, I would consider both sources about equal. I'm not sure if the MCU project is developing its own list of reliable sources or not. Sariel Xilo ( talk) 17:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
I would like to know why you feel it is appropriate to use reflinks named <ref name="RacistBacklashDoG">, <ref name="RacistBacklashTheGamer">, <ref name="RacistBacklashConversation">, and <ref name="RacistBacklash/Film"> to describe valid if politically incorrect criticism of unconventional casting. I have searched online as best I can and am unable to find any actual evidence of racist language used by critics of said casting although certain left-wing sources (The Daily Beast, Time Magazine) described such criticism as racist but, sadly, we live in an age when any criticism of certain sacred cows is automatically (reactionarily?) described as racist, sexist, homophobic (largely in abeyance, in favor of "transphobic"), etc. in certain political environments and media fora. As you are in New Zealand, on he ground so to speak in terms of actual filming, perhaps you could unearth at least some of the alleged actual racist backlash showing actual racist language used firsthand. You are far younger than I am and doubtless more adept in cyberspace. I may not be looking in the right places for this material. I would appreciate it. Thanks. MurrayGreshler ( talk) 18:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
valid if politically incorrect criticism of unconventional casting). - adamstom97 ( talk) 20:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Your removal of the template from Star Trek: Discovery was hasty, and not justified by any of the nine reasons listed in WP:WTRMT. I have little interest in a revert war, but I must note my disappointment with your actions in this instance, your edit summary was provocative and not up to the standard of WP:ESDOS - specifically "Don't make snide comments." The issues with the lead were clearly documented in the addition of the template and remain. That an issue 'has always been like that' is not a valid justification for removing the template when you did - the issues relating to lack of clarity, confused paragraphing, and duplication of information have not been resolved at all. H. Carver ( talk) 22:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding this, RT is not hiding any score. They accidentally added two reviews as season reviews, both rated 3.5/5 (7/10), therefore the average score was shown as 7/10 for a while. The scores of the episode reviews do not affect the overall average for now. ภץאคгöร 13:08, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Just to tell you (and probably remind you, it's been 3 weeks), I've begun work (the IRL stuff has been sorted out) on restructuring and adding new content/removing old content for the MCU Spidey article, to get it to GA status. — SirDot ( talk) 09:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
It appears that the upcoming TV show does indeed have Star Wars preceding the title. Per this article [5]. I was wondering if you could help with the move (back) to the proper name. As it will not let me.
Thank you, AdmiralAckbar1977 ( talk) 01:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
InfiniteNexus (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas!
This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Merry Christmas, Adamstom.97! Have a quantumanic new year! InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
— El Millo ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
— El Millo ( talk) 07:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Trailblazer101 ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Trailblazer101 ( talk) 16:48, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2023! |
Hello Adamstom.97, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2023. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
JOE BRO 64 14:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:What If... Captain Carter Fought the Hydra Stomper?, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Adamstom.97,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
17:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.