Sorry about that: I was trying to make the definition clearer but I absolutely see your point. TashTish ( talk) 19:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Grandpalla you reverted my edits on the film Jerry Maguire. The actor I added gets royalty payments from this film. Fred3337 Fred3337 ( talk) 05:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Nothing posted was incorrect, and I have documentation,royalty checks listing the film. I can’t speak to the reason why the film did not list the credit. What are the rules regarding film credits. If the information can be documented that SAG member was in the film, what else is required by wikipedia. Fred3337 ( talk) 20:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the SPI on that user. IT was a new one for me so I didn't recognize the behaviour. Meters ( talk) 02:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Nocturnal Animals shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sundayclose ( talk) 17:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
You were right about User:PickledEick. Thanks. Drmies ( talk) 18:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
If you have any additional comments or evidence to add, (since you are more familiar with this likely sock than I am), I made a report here. Zinnober9 ( talk) 02:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. That editor who denounced me for editwarring is now bludgeoning his way through the talk page of Theodosius I and is refusing to engage in dialogue with other editors who have replied to him. He does not know how to use indent, he writes one-sentence paragraphs, and his posts have already taken up a sizable amount of the talk page. Is there anything do be done here? I'm sorry if this is not something you want to involve yourself in further, and, if that's the case, let me know so I won't bother you further. Avilich ( talk) 17:41, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed your message on Jerodlycett's talkpage and decided to ask you about this issue. Jerodlycett was the one who warned UASG about their activity on the same page where we're currently having a slow burn edit war. I have no experience in dealing with such issues in English Wikipedia in particular, so I wanted to ask you to suggest what could be the fasted way to resolve the situation. You can notice that information added by me is being deleted and referred to as "fake", meanwhile it was literally the only referenced data in the whole article. -- Мурад 97 ( talk) 11:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Grandpallama , you might remember me from my edit on Grace Randolph . I was just wondering why you decided not to report ChromaticaCali to the administrators for edit warring and breaking the three revert rule. I was gonna do it myself but as I'm a new editor i don't really know how. I feel like editors like that who edit based on personal beliefs are the worst and wikipedia will be better off without them. Let me know what you think.✌️ Jaconsarto ( talk) 08:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
editors like that...are the worstis a personal attack, too. Neither of you is looking great in that department, and given the poor reasoning of the AfD nom (from a week-old account!), ChromaticaCali's concerns about your motivations are reasonable. Grandpallama ( talk) 14:29, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, if you have turned rv notifications on, you may have noticed that some random IP have rved some of your edits that rved edits by a blocked user, I agfed and assumed the editor has no connection with the blocked IP and happened to stumble upon the edits, you may think otherwise so here's the anon that I was talking about and I'll leave it up to you, I personally think we should AGF but the edits are a little bit hard to find unless you go specifically looking for them. Just i yaya 15:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey Grand. I basically agree with you on your statement about ignoring the banned editor. I just know he approaches nearly everyone who tackles the article and in doing so, some people will do what they request. On that note, I basically wanted to have a response on the talk page of why we are not doing it, so we can revert other people assuming good faith. Perhaps I should have phrased it without addressing the editor. Do you think I should just delete my post (and in turn, your response?) or just re-phrase it? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 18:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to bring to your attention that I feel like ChromaticaCali's history is very sketchy. All 20+ of their edits are related to removing criticism at Grace Randolph and calling everyone who adds it trolls. I don't know if this is worthy of a ban or anything but I just wanted to point out that it feels odd that they haven't edited a single page except Randolph's, and came out of 2 months of inactivity the day I added more information to Randolph's "controversy" section.-- Taynix ( talk) 02:36, 7 January 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)
00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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)
00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Excellent work uncovering a Madreterra sock. Bravo! Binksternet ( talk) 01:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
★Trekker (
talk) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate the
Winter or
Summer Solstice,
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec08}} to your friends' talk pages.
★Trekker ( talk) 11:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
In regards to the "someone else" bit, what I said on my talk wasn't entirely truthful. I was fully planning on copyediting and correcting the grammar in the article, and every other problem it had once I got it to a "good enough state" for mainspace, like I did with every other article of mine that I moved to mainspace (over time and later on, of course). Of course, someone planning an overhaul/complete rewrite may get in the way of that. I didn't want the editor to feel discouraged. Sorry if I unintentionally caused you any distress at all. DarmaniLink ( talk) 00:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry about that: I was trying to make the definition clearer but I absolutely see your point. TashTish ( talk) 19:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Grandpalla you reverted my edits on the film Jerry Maguire. The actor I added gets royalty payments from this film. Fred3337 Fred3337 ( talk) 05:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Nothing posted was incorrect, and I have documentation,royalty checks listing the film. I can’t speak to the reason why the film did not list the credit. What are the rules regarding film credits. If the information can be documented that SAG member was in the film, what else is required by wikipedia. Fred3337 ( talk) 20:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the SPI on that user. IT was a new one for me so I didn't recognize the behaviour. Meters ( talk) 02:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Nocturnal Animals shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sundayclose ( talk) 17:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
You were right about User:PickledEick. Thanks. Drmies ( talk) 18:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
If you have any additional comments or evidence to add, (since you are more familiar with this likely sock than I am), I made a report here. Zinnober9 ( talk) 02:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. That editor who denounced me for editwarring is now bludgeoning his way through the talk page of Theodosius I and is refusing to engage in dialogue with other editors who have replied to him. He does not know how to use indent, he writes one-sentence paragraphs, and his posts have already taken up a sizable amount of the talk page. Is there anything do be done here? I'm sorry if this is not something you want to involve yourself in further, and, if that's the case, let me know so I won't bother you further. Avilich ( talk) 17:41, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed your message on Jerodlycett's talkpage and decided to ask you about this issue. Jerodlycett was the one who warned UASG about their activity on the same page where we're currently having a slow burn edit war. I have no experience in dealing with such issues in English Wikipedia in particular, so I wanted to ask you to suggest what could be the fasted way to resolve the situation. You can notice that information added by me is being deleted and referred to as "fake", meanwhile it was literally the only referenced data in the whole article. -- Мурад 97 ( talk) 11:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Grandpallama , you might remember me from my edit on Grace Randolph . I was just wondering why you decided not to report ChromaticaCali to the administrators for edit warring and breaking the three revert rule. I was gonna do it myself but as I'm a new editor i don't really know how. I feel like editors like that who edit based on personal beliefs are the worst and wikipedia will be better off without them. Let me know what you think.✌️ Jaconsarto ( talk) 08:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
editors like that...are the worstis a personal attack, too. Neither of you is looking great in that department, and given the poor reasoning of the AfD nom (from a week-old account!), ChromaticaCali's concerns about your motivations are reasonable. Grandpallama ( talk) 14:29, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, if you have turned rv notifications on, you may have noticed that some random IP have rved some of your edits that rved edits by a blocked user, I agfed and assumed the editor has no connection with the blocked IP and happened to stumble upon the edits, you may think otherwise so here's the anon that I was talking about and I'll leave it up to you, I personally think we should AGF but the edits are a little bit hard to find unless you go specifically looking for them. Just i yaya 15:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey Grand. I basically agree with you on your statement about ignoring the banned editor. I just know he approaches nearly everyone who tackles the article and in doing so, some people will do what they request. On that note, I basically wanted to have a response on the talk page of why we are not doing it, so we can revert other people assuming good faith. Perhaps I should have phrased it without addressing the editor. Do you think I should just delete my post (and in turn, your response?) or just re-phrase it? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 18:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to bring to your attention that I feel like ChromaticaCali's history is very sketchy. All 20+ of their edits are related to removing criticism at Grace Randolph and calling everyone who adds it trolls. I don't know if this is worthy of a ban or anything but I just wanted to point out that it feels odd that they haven't edited a single page except Randolph's, and came out of 2 months of inactivity the day I added more information to Randolph's "controversy" section.-- Taynix ( talk) 02:36, 7 January 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)
00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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)
00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Excellent work uncovering a Madreterra sock. Bravo! Binksternet ( talk) 01:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
★Trekker (
talk) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate the
Winter or
Summer Solstice,
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec08}} to your friends' talk pages.
★Trekker ( talk) 11:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
In regards to the "someone else" bit, what I said on my talk wasn't entirely truthful. I was fully planning on copyediting and correcting the grammar in the article, and every other problem it had once I got it to a "good enough state" for mainspace, like I did with every other article of mine that I moved to mainspace (over time and later on, of course). Of course, someone planning an overhaul/complete rewrite may get in the way of that. I didn't want the editor to feel discouraged. Sorry if I unintentionally caused you any distress at all. DarmaniLink ( talk) 00:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC)