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 |
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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:107.242.125.34. Thank you. 107.242.125.34 ( talk) 23:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
The Prime Time Entertainment Network was just a blanket title for syndicated programming used by Warner Brothers. It was NOT a full-fledged network, even though several stations who carried PTEN-branded programming (like WWOR) eventually joined UPN in 1995. I have corrected this fact.
Rollosmokes 17:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
It was not a "blanket title for sydnicated programming" until CC/United Television pull out. The Federal Trade Commission & Federal Communication Commission does not consider a "TV Network" a TV Network untill it offers
15 hours of prime time(note 14) (7 PM to 11 PM) programming. I remember when the WB and UPN where starting up and that the were not offically considered networks. PTEN was structured the same way MyNetworkTV (MNTV) is now, sydnicated arm (20th Television) together with TV Station company consoritium (Fox Station Group). The Neworks prime time hourly offerings: MNTV 12, the
CW 13,
Fox 15,
ABC 22,
CBS 22,
NBC 22. I remember reference when UPN and the WB were starting up that they were not offical networks as they were below the specified hours but people considered them networks and as far as I know they never exceed 15 hours of programming. So as it stands you would have to remove MNTV, UPN, WB and CW as networks. But I think that most people would consider them as networks, since that was the intent when they were started as the affiliates got the whole programming.
Spshu 19:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to WWOR-TV, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. NeutralHomer T: C 14:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, as an administrator and someone who contributed to the PTEN discussion that PTEN is a network. Rollosmokes reverted my restoration of WWOR-TV PTEN affiliation. Then Neutralhomer attacks me as a vandal and refuses to look at the previous discussion that was archived. Now Neturalhomer is making threats to have me banned for his failure to follow the discussion and proof of PTEN's network status. Spshu 15:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Are you sure that Woolworth at Genesee Valley Center was replaced with KB Toys and other stores? Everyone I know says it was cut into smaller stores (possibly the Waldenbooks that you mentioned), and that after those smaller stores left, the former Woolworth was turned into Steve & Barry's. 68.188.191.9 12:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
You changed the owner of KFTY from Clear Channel to Newport; however, that information is not correct. The sale of the station (and others) from Clear Channel to Newport has not been approved by the FCC, even though Newport has already applied to sell KFTY to LK. The station should still list Clear Channel as its owner, not Newport. Please be more careful and verify your information before adding it to articles. Thanks. dhett ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
You recently reverted my edit that disambiguated Avengers on Demolition Man (comics). I disambiguated the wikilink again to direct it to the Avengers (comics) page instead of the Avengers disambiguation page. It is far better to be directed to the actual page mentioned than to have to go through a disambiguation page to find the page you are looking for. Aspects ( talk) 19:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Good work on the content regarding the Avengers. Sorry we've gotten off on the wrong foot as it were, but your work regarding much of that content has been quite good and useful. I wish controversial subjects like certain possible members didn't exist, but it seems that sort of thing is, at least now, unavoidable, given the apparent contradictions to date. If and when the Sourcebook is gotten and it is found to verify or not verify a certain party's membership, I do think that some sort of accomodation of it would be required, maybe using a formula like that I proposed on the talk page in question. That sort of statement, indicating that the official view of given storylines may have been changed since the text was first written, would probably be the clearest way out. I do hope you can understand though that as Hiding has said it isn't really that anyone wants to disagree with you or anyone else, it's just that we think we are bound by honor and the policies of wikipedia to acknowledge what the experts say, in this case a recent editor and writer, whether they agree with what was said earlier or not. John Carter ( talk) 15:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I dropped a note in at WT:CMC. ( Emperor ( talk) 05:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC))
TomCat4680 (
talk) has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
TomCat4680 ( talk) 14:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I have accepted this case on behalf of the Mediation Cabal. I have left comments here. Please try and remain civil throughout the discussion. ErikTheBikeMan ( talk) 19:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I know that you have had some issues, with edits made to the List of Avengers members article in the past. I am writing to remind you, that when there is a dispute, proper etiquette is to discuss it on the talk page, before entering into an edit war. Please refer to the talk page, for the consensus that was made, on the reversion of your edits to this article. Fortdj33 ( talk) 13:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey I fixed it for you... there was just no metadata template for the Know Nothing party yet (look at its talk page and you'll see what I'm talking about)... that was the problem.
So if you go look at it now it should be fine.
Thanks for letting me know.
- Prezboy1 talk 21:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, great new template -- an informative idea. It needs some tweaking (image to be centered, non-used lines to disappear until they're filled). Do you know how to do this, or can you point me to template code? Thanks! -- Tenebrae ( talk) 13:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for update and clean up on Halo Burger CFBancroft ( talk) 05:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The founding year for Halo Burger, which they clearly indicate on their logo, is 1923. Period. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 18:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
But Thomas did not own Kewpees at all. He just had the rights to use the name; he was a licensee. Just as you would not consider a local franchisee of McDonald's as actually being McDonalds. Ed Adams of Toledo, Ohio owned Kewpee in 1945, not Thomas. Reporting the edit war on Halo Burger's Facebook page is meaningless and anti-wikipedian. Spshu ( talk) 21:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
First you state it is about the "original Harrison Street restaurant" then its is about "But the business still does." That is what I am pointing out. You have no clue. Spshu ( talk) 13:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Right then the restaurant started in 1923, Thomas' business that became Haloburger started in 1944 thus the multiple years in the foundation. But, you come out against the business notion then you switch positions back and forth. Spshu ( talk) 13:40, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Please do not remove valid references from an article. I don't see any reason why you should have to do so. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
No other article has a timeline. The one that's there is 100% redundant to the rest of the article. Why should it exist? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 00:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Logos do not lie. Read it. It says "Since 1923." Can that be any more plain? Steelbeard1 ( talk) 19:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:BTHaloburger.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 16:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their
user talk page. |
I have this other, editor Steelbeard1, has argued over fact of Halo Burger's founding but fails to comprend what any one is saying. The 3RR page always says if it content then go to mediation. He was also aware of his edit warring as going as far as to attempt to enlist others in his edit warring: TenPoundHammer, Rich Farmbrough, GrahamHardy, Denisarona. And reports me to HB's Facebook page.
Because there was content, I posted notices on the various projects/taskforces listed on the talk page. While the newcommers indicated that I was right, they indicted that one only year should be in the infobox as the rest would be in the article. So I devised a compromise to end the repetitive and debunked arguments.
He is now edit warring over the article being move to the Economy of Flint, Michigan instead of the Flint, Michigan Catagory which is basically in as it is a subcat. of Flint, Michigan.
I guess I am at complete loss on how to deal with him. Spshu ( talk) 22:09, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm familiar with Grand Blanc back then and Genesee County NEVER had an IHOP until this year. The Halo Burger which was in downtown Grand Blanc was a Perkins Pancake House. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 03:10, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
This citation at "11351"+%2B+"old+bridge"&dq="11351"+%2B+"old+bridge"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiWtZWa3t7QAhVPwWMKHRy-D1AQ6AEIGjAA proves that 11351 S. Saginaw in Grand Blanc which was Perkins Pancake House became a Halo Burger. So there. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 04:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
I'll note it there, but really, as long as he's not requesting unblock again it's not relevant. Daniel Case ( talk) 16:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I undid all of your moves. The naming has been discussed within the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting several times; since there a very little sources for English translations of associations' names, the project decided to keep article titles in the original language until there is real use of the English translation. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Article names#Main Points. All German associations use multiple translations in their official documents depending on the translator. -- jergen ( talk) 16:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
So, I guess you either use WOSM's naming convention or word for word order might make sense too. Spshu ( talk) 17:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.
In the Germany Language sentence order of the words are not as important as it is in the English language. Secondly for additional translation can be set up as redirects and indicated in the article. I just saying that using WOSM's translation, as most people might find these to be the most easily recognizable translation for the organizations' name as WOSM is a recognized international organization for WOSM's members. None of the other translations would be discounted they would just be used as redirects and indicated in the article. Spshu ( talk) 18:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Using a non-free image in the infobox is a clear policy violation. As to whether a free image is possible, Getty images manages to have taken 16 photos of her at public events without stalking her. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 19:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this edit. Is there some evidence for this? The township doesn't appear to use that form. While I have not seen the township charter for Vienna Township, I have looked at others that were available online, and there are some which do not use that form. That is, there are cases where the official charter creating the charter township does not use that form. So unless there is evidence that that is the official name, I don't think it is safe to assume that there is a "standard" official name. older ≠ wiser 21:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Steve Crossin The clock is ticking.... 09:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Move to Deford, Michigan talk page.
I see that you've restarted the Dayne Walling article, now that he has a stronger claim to notability. If you would like any of the information from the previously deleted version, drop a note on my page and I'll get it for you. -- Philosopher Let us reason together. 05:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I see you deleted anything negative about Dayne Walling. His documented failures as the mayor of Flint should be placed in his record. Under his leadership crime has past record's in the history of the city. Homicide alone doubled under his failed leadership. I am not sure who you are but documented information should be allowed in this profile.
Two editors have removed one infobox from the article Lotharingia, and you have the nerve to add two? Both of which do nothing to clarify a complex subject. You are not helping the encyclopedia. Srnec ( talk) 20:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Just wanted to let you know that your edits to President pro tempore of the United States Senate seem to be causing some error messages with the reference section. I can't figure out what exactly you were trying to do. Cheers! meamemg ( talk) 21:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:United States federal executive departments#"Federal" or "National"?. — Markles 17:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC) (Using {{ Please see}})
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is New United States Football League. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New United States Football League. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
A discussion has begun about whether the article New United States Football League, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New United States Football League until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — UncleDouggie ( talk) 03:56, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I can see why you might think that this is not the most appropriate name for the article, but in my experience it is far more commonly used in English language sources on this topic than the English translation. A Google search (restricted to English language pages) shows a 6 to 1 ratio in favour of "Federation Internationale de l'Automobile" over "International Automobile Federation" (See this vs this). It rises to 10 to 1 if not restricted to English language.
WP:EN does not, as far as I can see, say that articles must be named in the English language. It does say "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources". There must be some, but I can't think of any reliable sources on motorsport that use the English language version.
Cheers 4u1e ( talk) 16:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
P.S. There are several active wikiprojects covering this topic - if you're not convinced by my arguments, the most appropriate one to discuss it at is probably WP:MOTOR. Cheers. 4u1e ( talk) 16:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
Hey there Spshu, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Spshu/Sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
Thank you, -- DASHBot ( talk) 05:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
What you talking bout? Brian Boru is awesome ( talk) 22:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Spshu. I'd like to ask about this move to Seaboard Periodicals, which, as you note, is the formal name of the company. However, under Wikipedia naming conventions, we're supposed to use the subject's common name, and this company is routinely referred to as Atlas/Seaboard. Certainly, a change of this magnitude probably shouldn't have been undertaken without discussion on the talk page, for this very reason. Let's please discuss. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
An Unofficial Atlas/Seaboard Checklist
"Rise & Fall of Rovin's Empire" A candid conversation with Atlas/Seaboard editor Jeff Rovin Conducted by Jon B. Cooke Transcribed by Jon B. Knutson
by Jon B. Cooke Comic Book Artist #16
See [2]. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 23:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Nice add with that subhead — "Culture" is indeed distinct from "History." My compliments. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 15:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
DreamWorks. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. MikeWazowski ( talk) 23:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I was being very polite and you jumped down my throat. You are a mean person and you do article owning. You do it to other people and you are doing it here. You never want anyone to edit your work. And may I say that you are not a good writer because you writing is convoluted, it doesn't follow a straight line, it leaves things out and you misuse words. Other editors have trouble with you, too, I can see. -- Farpointer ( talk) 19:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the three reverts you have made at
Cadence Industries. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 00:56, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Except for the fact that the Cadence logo is for the current company with that name in the distribution and assembly of telecom equipment founded in 2007. Not sure how we hand that when the current company's only claim to fame is having the same name as a previously existing company. Spshu ( talk) 13:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not sure this is precisely correct. International Catalogue, which makes that statement, says its taking its information from Nevins. But Nevins is referring to Timely Publications, the overall pulp and comics publisher, and not the Timely Comics imprint: "Timely Publications (as Goodman's group had become known; before this it was known as "Red Circle" because of the logo that Goodman had put on his pulp magazines)." And Bellman refers to "a multitude of corporate entities (including Red Circle Comics) all producing the same product," just as Goodman had done with Azimuth, Zenith, etc. under the Atlas Comics imprint.
If you go to the Grand Comics Database, there's no listing for Red Circle as a publisher (except related to Archie Comics decades later) and the only "indicia publisher" paper corp. related to Goodman is a handful of 1950s Atlas comics. And Marvel Comics #1 was published by Timely Publications. (See GCD here), and there was no red circle on any subsequent issues. (See GCD here.) Goodman's pulps have a red circle on their covers, and that's what Nevins is referring to. As for Bellman, as I said, the only Red Circle Comics that Goodman published were a handful of Atlas titles in the 1950s.
I'd like to discuss this with you first before I edit that line. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 15:15, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
I didn't disagree with the Marvel Comics #1, I in fact pointed out that is why the comic book historian latched onto the name "Timely". ("Timely only selected as the representative name for Goodman's publishing group as a historian that began to research Marvel's history latched onto it given it being the publisher of Marvel Comics #1 not knowing that Goodman published under a number of corporations.") Look at some covers found on some of the Timely sites, Goodman didn't put any imprint/brand on some of the covers at all. Calling "Red Circle Comics" would seem logical with the common name for Goodman's pulp and other publishing ventures (Red Circle Books/Lion Books) being called Red Circle by historian in a similar situation to selecting Timely as neither were used consistantly by Goodman. I did remove the Marvel section from the Red Circle Comics article do to it being a nonindependent source referenced and the creation of the Red Circle (publishing) article and insertion of "Red Circle Comics" as a alternative name in the Timely Comics article. But back to your suggestion to place it in a foot note go ahead. Spshu ( talk) 13:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
In sincere appreciation of all your hard work editing and your detailed knowledge of corporate structure, both helping to make WikiProject Comics even better -- Tenebrae ( talk) 17:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC) |
You might want to take a look at another editor's change to the Marvel Comic infobox. I think you'd know the infobox protocol of "Owner" vs. "Parent" better than I. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 00:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Spshu! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click
HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:23, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hello. I was just wondering if you explain your reasoning for converting Harry Flynn into a disambiguation page? It seems to have resulted in the creation of a large number of disambiguation links most of which are intended to point to the Bishop. In my mind he appears to be the primary topic. As far as I can see "Harry Flynn" the publisher does not appear to be linked to any other articles. Perhaps you could point out that articles in which this subject is mentioned? Thanks, France3470 (talk) 18:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
A page you created, 'Green Oak, Michigan, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it redirects from an implausible misspelling.
You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.
Thank you. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 15:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I see you tried to trim this {navbox}. It didn't stick, as some want several thousand links in there. Perhaps you'd care to comment at Template talk:Disney#Purpose of a navbox. And see WP:HLIST and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-11-21/Technology report for info on current methods of implementing navboxes. Alarbus ( talk) 09:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
On 14 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jeff Wright (politician), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Jeff Wright, a county drain commissioner in Michigan, has also served as an FBI informant? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jeff Wright (politician).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
At this point you are being disruptive. You can take it to the talk page or to WP:FILMS if you like, but stop trying to edit war to get your way.
- J Greb ( talk) 00:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I realize I was wrong on reverting you first before discussing. Will you please accept my humble apology by having a cookie. BTW I hope you at least see some of my point on what I was concerned about and didn't take it the wrong way like J Greb did.
Cookies! | ||
Jhenderson777 has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
Spshu, over at Talk:Anglican Use there is a proposal to revert the redirect to Anglican Use of the Pastoral Provision article. -- Bruce Hall ( talk) 05:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
I think you should understand more about how the studios work and ownership by conglomerates.
Look at this old link I found before CBS Films was re-established:
And second, look at the article Major film studio because CBS Films is indeed a mini-major studio among other mini-majors that are listed. Plus, RKO Pictures is still alive and making films. http://www.rko.com
Let me know if you have anymore questions King Shadeed 13:17, July 9, 2012 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to WVIR-DT3, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC) 21:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Regarding your decision to label digital subchannels (many of which I created out of recognition of their increasing occurrence) as not meeting Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, I assure you that they do. Obviously, there may be a digital subchannel that is associated with a specialty "diginet" such as This TV and Me-TV that does not originate any local programming. However, I assume those added with new affiliation agreements with a big four television network (in markets lacking a major network affiliate) should be considered as important as a primary digital network station. While I will not resort to edit warring with the physical removal of the labels, I nicely urge you to consult an article's talk page first (or feel free to start one) on those pages that you would like to consider making changes (i.e. fundamental reasons why a page should or should not be created and basic article formatting). Personally, I think article talk pages are underutilized and editors simply choose to "revert now and ask questions later". I, for one, would gladly begin to practice what I preach here. Strafidlo ( talk) 02:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I have went through and rollbacked all of the blanketing of articles with GNG templates, near-vandalism deletion of information on pages and merging, all without consensus. I am tired of your running roughshod around the rules, so if you retemplate any of the subchannel pages, you will be blocked. If you mass delete tons of information from an article, you will be blocked. If you merge articles without discussion, you will be blocked. If you do anything without reading the rules first and getting consensus, you will be blocked. If you can do any of those things, then...you guessed it...you will be blocked. Between you and DreamMcQueen, your going around the rules to serve your own agendas is going to stop.
Straighten up, fly right, or...well, be blocked. Consider this your only warning. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at NBC California Nonstop shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You are also near 3RR on numerous other articles. Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC) 00:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
We are not doing this again, you didn't get consensus on three seperate talk pages now, you don't have consensus, you have moved into disruptive editing and a slow-moving content dispute where only you are disputing the content. Stop now. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
←There you go, since you just want to try to rub it in my nose so bad. Just because you project your own faults on me. Instead it will remain as a monument of you poor boorish behavior. Spshu ( talk) 22:04, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Why did you change Marvel Universe back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milomilk ( talk • contribs) 00:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Why do you have deleted my message in your talk page? I saw the discussion. Even there is consensus, the name Italo-Albanian still remains incorrect. -- Prodebugger ( talk) 23:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Do not, for ANY circumstances, remove any post that was not by you as you have done
here. -
Neutralhomer •
Talk • 22:58, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I noticed the NBC Owned Television Stations article you been working on at User:Spshu/Sandbox3. It looks good and has more than enough references to meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). I think it's about time to move it to the NBC Owned Television Stations page. Powergate92 Talk 02:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
←Where is your evidence that it still exists, King Shadeed? Your own "proof" is to latch on to two marketing executive titles and ignore the presents of two chairs for NBC Entertainment and NBC Broadcasting and that the page is for NBC ENTERTAINMENT not NBCU TV Group. Neither person's job description in their bio indicates that they jointly run NBCU TV Group but that they report directly to NBCU's CEO. Spshu ( talk) 13:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
There's no point on moving the page to NBC Entertainment since that's a different division. This discussion is over. King Shadeed 20:26, October 11, 2012 (UTC)
←The SUBJECT IS NOT CLOSED nor can you declare it closed. As my last post showed I did "read on who is in charge". Marketing is a support function in most companies and thus not in charge. You continue to fail to read and conprend my posts. -- Spshu ( talk) 15:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Marvel Studios shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 19:20, 10 October 2012 (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. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 18:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
VernoWhitney ( talk) 17:19, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, the current article isn't anything like the previous article (which was mostly an ad) and does attest notability with references that are dated after the previous deletion discussion. If someone wants to list it for deletion again, I can't stop it, but as it stands, it's fine by me. -- Bobet 20:52, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Spshu. Hope you're well; haven't heard from you in a while. I'm curious about the notability tag you placed at Topps Comics. As I wrote on the talk page, it was a well-established company that produced a large number of high-profile products by major comics creators and featuring many major licensed properties. I'd urge you to place a rationale on the talk page, since without it, there's no way to address any specific concerns. Honestly, on the face of it, Im perplexed as to why the tag is there, and without a rationale people can respond to, it doesn't really stand on its own. Hoping to hear from you. With regards, -- Tenebrae ( talk) 20:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I see that you are about to remove the MLG Productions article. I just wanted to have a solo article about it. TheWikiMan95 Mario Saenz 16:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey all :).
I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).
You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office connect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 23:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
You've recently been adding the Star Wars character Yoda to The Muppets template. I want to clarify why your edits are incorrect and have been undone.
I hope this message clarifies the inconsistencies that were evident in your edits. Thank you. ~
Jedi94 (
talk) 02:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
1. The Muppet template wasn't limit itself to the "The Muppet Show" franchises. This is appearently your own view of it.
2a. You give no such source for this and there isn't one in the Yoda article for Freeborn's creating Yoda.
2b. Henson's Company as Oz was assign to Yoda in the creation of Yoda.
2c. They called it a muppet do to Henson's involvement in its creation that has been the designation for Henson's puppets. It is your personal opinion about it being tongue in cheek.
2d. Of course, Yoda status doesn't change, it is a muppet in common usage. But with the Lucasfilm purchase it can be consider a "Muppet".
3. This all (below) came out when Big Bird was brought up in the 2012 Presidential Campaign.
3a. No Disney refers to the as
Disney's The Muppets. Sesame Workshop purhased the right to call their muppets
Muppets from EM TV and isn't subject to Disney; the trademark was split.
3b. Incorrect, muppets are created by
Jim Henson's Creature Shop as that is where Sesame Workshop gets their Muppets as they have no in house creation facilities.
Spshu (
talk) 14:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi! It looks like you've been challenging the notability of a number of high-profile Muppets performers. I am confused by this, as the two articles I spot-checked both are performers who at a glance easily fulfill the notability guidelines in WP:ENT. I've removed the flag, and put justification on the Talk page. Is there a reason you are doing this? -- Metahacker ( talk) 15:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
(edit) Looking at it further, you are also deleting content, including sourced content and references, from these pages with no explanation but "Nota." <a href=" https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Cheryl_Wagner&diff=prev&oldid=528677096">example 1</a>, <a href=" https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jerry_Nelson&diff=prev&oldid=528673556">example 2</a>. What reason do you have for this behavior? -- Metahacker ( talk) 15:40, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place concerning the changes that have been made at Template:The Muppets.
The article will be discussed at Template talk:The Muppets#Shortening names until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and policies and guidelines relevant to Wikipedia. ~ Jedi94 ( talk) 00:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Holiday Cheer | ||
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer 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. Share the good feelings. |
Just curious as to what you mean about Walling's religion and such not being confirmed. I posted a link. He attends a United Methodist church; he has offered that much. He doesn't have to officially announce his religion for us to list one at Wikipedia. I also think it's silly you removed his party affiliation. You are being too cute by a half and a bit overly careful/protective for whatever reason. -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 02:54, 28 December 2012 (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. N-HH talk/ edits 21:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Template:Kraft Foods Group a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a " cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I am the editor who created the Kanbar Entertainment article and am unsure why you removed the references that you did. According to Wikipedia policy ( WP:Primary), primary sources are allowed as long as they are used as references for non-controversial facts, as was the case with the coryedwards.com reference and the interworks.com reference. The northsidesf.com reference was a professional magazine, so I can't see why that one would be a problem. The fullecirclestuff blog reference consisted of an interview with the film's director and I had verified its authenticity by including a page from the director's official website where he mentions and links to the interview. I first used this reference on the Hoodwinked! article and before including it there, asked whether it would be acceptable at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I was told that it would probably be okay, and since then Hoodwinked! has passed a Featured Article nomination without anyone opposing the reference.
I would also like to discuss the studio's notability. According to Wikipedia's notability guidelines ( WP:ORG), an organization or company is notable if it has received significant coverage by reliable and independent sources. I feel that the article from Variety about the lawsuit between Kanbar Entertainment and the Weinstein Company is at least one demonstration of "significant coverage". While the studio is not the primary subject of the other references, the guidelines simply state that multiple sources are needed if the subject is not discussed in great depth by any of them. Kanbar Entertainment is mentioned in at least three other independent reliable sources (The Northside magazine, the LA Times blogpost, which was written by a staff writer, and the Tulsa World newspaper). The guidelines don't specify how many sources are needed, and while these four certainly do not constitute a lot of coverage, I do feel that they provide enough coverage. -- Jpcase ( talk) 01:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
While it is apparent your good intention to give the Walt Disney Animation Studios article a superior quality, you must be careful when doing this. There was excessive use of "citation needed", in many cases absurd, as in the first paragraph of the 1950s section (now fixed).
It is also important to prevent unnecessary information in the article. A previous version of Circle 7 Animation history in the article made it seem that the studio had some connection with Walt Disney Animation Studios, while the only thing that connected the two studios was that the C7A employees moved to WDAS. This will be fixed.
Another issue was the removal of the introduction paragraph of the article. Although the second paragraph contained duplicate information, remotion of the third paragraph was completely wrong. There was no duplicated information in it and was consistent with what was proposed by the Article development and The perfect article official guides. This will also be fixed.
Anyway, keep doing the good job, but taking care to avoid excess, unnecessary information and things that are not really connected to WDAS.
Tim Week ( talk) 22:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Tim Week
At the news that you've linked is very clear that "the unit, which is being kept separate from Disney's main feature animation division". C7A was never any subdivision or studio of WDAS, the only thing that once linked the history of the studios was that the C7A have been closed and the employees moved to WDAS, nothing more.
And my complaint about the removal of content was only related to the fact that this occurred during the introductory paragraphs of the article, something vital for the presentation of the studio for a reader. I will make the restoration of vital parts, then disregard what I said before.
Tim Week ( talk) 00:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Tim Week
What criterion are you using to consider that articles with dozens of references from reliable sources do not meet the WP:GNG? Diego ( talk) 21:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
←Still, from the book's name it isn't primarily about Birdo. Spshu ( talk) 13:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
When Mattel and Fisher-Price is no longer own HIT Entertainment next year. Disney acquires this company and deal is due to be finalized in February 2014. Sent me a message please and contact Disney if you can. SmallSoldiers123 ( talk)
" [article] at Don Markstein's Toonopedia" is the consensus format across WikiProject Comics. Its consistent use marks a consensus. It's important to have stylistic consistency, so I've restored the citation to the way it's generally seen throughout WPC. I hope you understand and can go along with this standardized form. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
You are removing factual content under your claims of removing FB and Twitter links. For one, FB and Twitter are acceptable SPS sources if we can verify the owner. But the other details you are removing are factually correct and so your edits appear to be completely improper. -- MASEM ( t) 20:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
←No I can if it is not source, I can remove it since they are not proper sources. Spshu ( talk) 21:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
←You cannot confirm it, just your claims as having done so. Twitter is a blog (micro) and are consider unrealible. They are primary source, no original research is allowed here. Spshu ( talk) 22:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. MASEM ( t) 20:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I have noticed that you have removed some information from article " Lauren Faust" ( [11], [12]). Now, the reasoning is obviously similar to the one you used for the article " My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic", discussed above ( [13]). However, that discussion concerns content and I would like to make a behavioral point (well, maybe more).
Looking at your last edits I have seen many cases when you removed information without references or with references that you have found insufficient. That didn't happen just in the articles I have mentioned, but also in " Primate (bishop)" ( [14]). Now, it is true that all material should have good sources, but I think there are several problems with your approach.
First, the removals look rather hasty. In none of these cases the information looked obviously wrong. Couldn't the information without sources get Template:Citation needed? And the information with suspicious sources - Template:Unreliable source? And the information which is not confirmed by the given source - Template:Not in source? And then, after the template stays for some time - a week, a month, a year - the information could be removed without the conflicts. Or it could be sourced instead. As you can see, doing otherwise can end up less well...
Second, it would have been preferable to explain your reasoning. While in some cases it could be guessed easily, the edit summaries saying "remove FB & twitter source info; shorten opening;" ( [15]) cannot be easily understood to say that you think that it is not certain that the authorship of the sources hasn't been demonstrated ( [16]). A post on the talk page would have made your reasoning much clearer.
By the way, you should also participate in the discussions that already exist. In case of " Primate (bishop)" you have reverted User:Irish Melkite ( [17]) without answering him on the talk page ( [18])...
Third, you should revert less... [19], [20], [21], [22]... More discussion, less reverting.
Finally, some more effort to find references could prove beneficial. For example, it was not that hard to find out that " Nostra Aetate" of the Second Vatican Council ( [23]) has a signature (among others, of course): "† Ego ANDREAS ROHRACHER, Archiepiscopus Salisburgensis, Primas Germaniae."... That would be a very good indicator that Archbishop of Salzburg is "Primas Germaniae", wouldn't you agree..?
So, I hope that things will get calmer soon and everything will be solved. -- Martynas Patasius ( talk) 19:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
You may wish to join in the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussion on Code of Canon Law as reliable source for Catholic canon law and GCatholic.org. Esoglou ( talk) 09:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Any reason why you think he's not notable? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Was there any other reason to add the "Primary sources" tag? I have discussed this in Talk:Dungeons & Dragons/Archives/ 8#Article issues? You can discuss it there. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:12, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Please stop adding links to other navboxes in existing navboxes. Please read WP:NAVBOX and WP:Navigation templates to understand how they work. They are there to provide links to existing articles. -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 18:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your help cleaning up the AIG article. Do you have a quick moment to look at this section [30]? Right now, it has no context to anything. The original sponsorship post had context. Could we find a way to incorporate this chronologically in an existing element and remove this standalone entry. Let's do that? By the way, I'm working on correcting the chronology and grammatical errors in the article. I am also working on distinguishing the financial crisis from AIG's repayment of the loan. Thanks for helping out. Hiland109 ( talk) 17:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the work on updating the Sponsorship section into the History chronology. I'm working on expanding the history of AIG. Interested to collaborate? Hiland109 ( talk) 15:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Why did you delete the Dream Quest Images article and redirect to Disney Animation, rather than simply appending your summary of Dream Quest's work to the Disney page and linking to the main article? In doing so, you've eliminated valuable historical information (credit list, for example) as well as the original article's history. Hats off to Disney Animation and all, but I think some wiki readers might be interested to learn more about Dream Quest. Please consider replacing the original article by undoing your edit and then link to that from your Disney Animation article. Tekkonkinkreet ( talk) 14:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand your combative response, but I'm sorry to have bothered you. Please note that I didn't revert your changes or make any edits to your article. I was simply asking for an explanation for your deleting some useful information about DQI. I don't want to argue with you about the relative notability of " Disney animation studios" and DQI - obviously we disagree. But it seems to me that notability, by itself, doesn't really justify your having actually deleted the original article. And I might add that the fact that no one responded to your query for comments does not excuse your actions either. You might have simply added a DQI section to your " Disney animation studios" article and referenced the original article for those interested in a more detailed discussion of DQI's history. That, it seems to me, would have achieved your goal of incorporating DQI to the " Disney animation studios" article while also allowing for expansion of the DQI article beyond what might be relevant to a discussion of " Disney animation studios" as a whole. (An example: Microsoft acquired Skype, but there remains a Skype Technologies article). Again, I'm sorry for any inconvenience my question has caused you. Tekkonkinkreet ( talk) 16:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Am I correct in understanding that your main criticism is a lack of external sources? Not to contradict anything you've said, I will just mention here that the bulk of DQ's innovation was prior to the Disney acquisition, as a visual effects company, not as an animation company. Visual effects industry experts I've spoken with on the subject (including three I spoke with at Disney Animation in May of this year) are quick to acknowledge DQ's having taken the art of visual effects to a new level at a crucial period of transition from photo-mechanical (so-called "analog") VFX to digital (CGI) techniques. The fact that DQ was not very adept at promoting its own work to the public is an unfortunate one. Regardless, I'm currently collecting print sources that cover DQ's work (industry and popular press as well as a few books) and hope you'll reconsider allowing DQ it's own page in addition to the mention in your Disney animation studios article once I've got this together. Thank you. Tekkonkinkreet ( talk) 03:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)Notability isn't transferable, so winning Oscars or other awards doesn't necessarily make DQI/Secret Lab notable.
A Google search leads to a trip to the LA Times search engine, and the LA Times wrote quite a few articles on Dream Question Images: http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/dream-quest-images. It makes me no personal nevermind, but according to the rules, significant third party coverage, major achievements in field in question, and Academy Awards would very much make it notable as a histroical topic. Its later acquisition by Disney should not render this invalid. -- FuriousFreddy ( talk) 19:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Are there any reasons you insist that...
-- 98.26.30.240 ( talk) 20:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems that you mean to show support for Keeping the templates, but you never officially bolded any such sentiment at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_July_4#Template:U._S._Network_Shows_footer.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 13:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
I reverted your edits to Bay City, Michigan because you removed information such as the makeup of "West Bay City" being comprised of Banks, Salzburg, and Wenona. Also, consolidating the limited information you left under the section "Neighborhood" makes little sense, as it belongs in the "History" section.-- Asher196 ( talk) 20:17, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
WildStorm. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. postdlf ( talk) 03:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Imprints of DC Comics, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth ( talk) 19:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I have given my explanation - the extra reference tags are not needed in the infobox, just sourcing the new, unknown production company. And your reverting of the citation, is not consistent to how the sources are used on the page. Favre1fan93 ( talk) 21:42, 5 August 2013 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Favre1fan93 (Result: ). Thank you. Favre1fan93 ( talk) 21:44, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Please read WP:SELFSOURCE and note that it is acceptable to use Twitter as a source about information about themselves or their works. You may also wish to take a note of the following policies WP:BRD, WP:3RR and WP:EW and remember to discuss changes on a talk page. -- MisterShiney ✉ 21:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
This is a notice that there is a discussion involving yourself at Talk:Marvel Television#August 2013 content dispute. I invite to please come and participate. Thank you.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I no longer edit TV stations, mostly because of you. So you are now edit-warring across numerous TV station articles with yourself. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Apparently you failed to understand the reason not to change the information on the Tribune Entertainment page. I read the source from "Broadcasting & Cable", where it says in the article "Tribune has named Warner Bros. executive Matt Cherniss president/general manager of WGN America and the newly formed Tribune Studios.". Tribune Studios is a new entity of the Tribune Company and is not formerly known as Tribune Entertainment, where that company was shut down after Tribune announced to end its television distribution business says here. If Tribune Entertainment was renamed Tribune Studios, all sources would've said so, therefore they didn't. So this is your warning to you regarding to this information before you end up edit warring, which is against rules and regulations here at Wikipedia. Edit warring can cause you to get blocked from editing. Read the sources properly next time without starting any trouble, and have a nice day. Thank you. 99.46.226.13 ( talk) 01:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Block message:
original block message
Decline reason: Procedural decline; open-proxy review requests must be made at the IP talk page. — Daniel Case ( talk) 19:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Spshu, happy to meet you :-) We appear to have a conflict concerning the interpretation of the CE article, and in particular, as you say, the first paragraph, as nowhere do I find anything close in meaning to "This particular church is also referred to by the name Italo-Greek Catholic Church [no objections to this part], which is derived from the Italo-Greek (Italo-Græcus) demonym which was traditionally used to classify the inhabitants of Southern Italy and Sicily; people who are modern day Italians but are historically of Greek origin." IMHO you are making confusion in part due to the outdated nature of the source which tends to uniform Greeks and Albanians, whichin Italy have long been felt as one due to there common Byzantine origin. The article then continues in the first paragraph to apply those that are part of the church: 1) old ecclesiastical communities; 2) all those Greek colonies founded by Greek merchants in important Italian maritime cities; 3) the Greek and Albanian minorities present on Italian soil, especially the latter. Adding a personal opinion, I suspect this article is rather outdated (1913) and that in the meanwhile Greek and Albanian minorities in Italy have been separated (I find it extremely tough to believe the Greek minority would have stayed in a church called "Italo-Albanian"). I hope to have persuaded you; if not at all, well maybe we should try some sort of dispute resolution. Aldux ( talk) 15:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
On August 27 when updating the Flint Metro League article to reflect the upcoming changes to that league beginning in 2014, I noticed in this revision that you changed the table from the one I had put there in March and said that you had "restored sourced version." I had kept the sources in my revision but had presented the information in a more conventional table and narrative.
IMHO, the table on the current revision of the article is awkward and cumbersome. I've never seen information presented in a table that way. I think that a more conventional table with a graphical timeline would be appropriate (I had done both of these things on the Big Nine Conference article), but I'd like to know what you think. Dafoeberezin3494 ( talk) 21:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm starting a discussion here so our explanations aren't restricted by edit summaries, and to avoid any future edit warring at Walt Disney Pictures.
I'd like to know what you're trying uphold between Walt Disney Pictures and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. In this edit, you claimed that WDP and WDSMP are the same and yet in these subsequent edits [32] [33] you're telling Trivialist and I to stop mixing them up (which we're not, we have them as seprate units). What exactly are you asserting?
WDP is a production company/film label/banner/brand. WDSMP is the The Walt Disney Studios' overall theatrical distribution division, which distributes films from other units besides WDP (including Marvel, Touchstone, and Disneynature). That's essentially what Trivialist and I are trying to keep intact. Also, the reason as to why there is a "Not to be confused with..." at the article's top, is to disambiguate WDP from WDSMP, since they both have similarly-sounding names.
Like I explained in one of my edit summaries, your edits have absolutely no reputable sources to back them up. That makes your edits original research and fair game for us to revert them on that basis alone. The article already had sources proving that Walt Disney Pictures is a film label and now, all of a sudden, you're changing up the whole article and removing such references. Examples include;
Thanks. I hope to expect a civil and timely response soon. ~ Jedi94 ( talk) 20:29, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
So, Walt Disney Studios isn't an "reputable sources" about the name of its units? "[ But per Walt Disney Studios, what we call Walt Disney Pictures is called Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures and per the Walt Disney Co.'s Our businesses page: The Walt Disney Studios states "Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures" - "Industry: Live-Action Film Production" Business Week also indicates that "Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Inc. operates as a motion picture and television feature distribution company." Business Week also shows separate presidents of Disney Studios Motion Pictures for production and distribution."
unit | formed | Pre-drop of BV name | Current full name |
---|---|---|---|
production | 1950 | Walt Disney Pictures (?) | Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Production |
distribution | 1953 | Buena Vista Pictures Distribution Co. | Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Distribution |
Now since you didn't show me where the answer to my questions is and you acted all moany and huffy, the article has been protected. We could have even made a deal, but no, you just undid my edits because you think they aren't correct. 78.146.191.228 ( talk) 20:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
That's strange. I don't remember a Jetix Play in UK. TDFan2006 ( talk) 20:41, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
If Jetix Play in UK was Telewest exclussive and it closed in 2007, how did Jetix Play close in 2010? The Toon Disney Guy ( talk) 09:34, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Justice League 3000 receives significant coverage in reliable sources. All of those sources are deemed reliable sources by Wikipedia standards. Dream Focus 20:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Spshu, I have blocked you for 24 hours for edit warring, which should have been an obvious outcome of you continuing to revert other editors at Justice League 3000. postdlf ( talk) 21:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Spshu, you are wikilawyering and I'm not playing that game with you. I blocked you to stop further edit warring, noting only that there were multiple editors disagreeing with you regardless of what you think the correct guideline interpretation is. I didn't even realize it at the time I blocked you, but I personally warned you on this talk page for the same kind of edit warring in the same subject area just a few months ago. And you are all over the archives of the edit warring noticeboard, having already received multiple warnings going back more than a year. You will discuss disagreements, and you will respect the consensus of other editors instead of reverting to get your way. Further conduct of the same kind will result in additional blocks. postdlf ( talk) 18:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, postdlf, you seem to have failed to do any investigation of Dream Focus who has 350 trips to the Admin Noticeboards and is a know super-inclusionist. And 3 editors (Dream Focus, IP editor & Masem) is not multiple editors by any definition, heck I have had 5 to 2 called no consensus and 7 to 1 called thin consensus. Masem, thanks for discussing the matter even if we don't agree, unlike other.
Audience
The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary.
Independence of sources
A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon it.
WP:SIGCOV: "The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected." "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Spshu ( talk) 14:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget "...media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; .." Spshu ( talk) 20:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I noticed you changed some callsigns on the O&O TV page to the base callsigns as opposed to their actual F.C.C.-issued callsign (e.g.: KCNC-TV is the legal call, not KCNC). The full legal callsign should always be displayed, not the base. Stereorock ( talk) 21:10, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I've moved it back to the article namespace - the article has worth, as some of the imprints do lack general content, it just needs to be cleaned up a bit. Also, you originally moved the article into a userpage namespace, rather than a sandbox sub-page under your own user page; don't know if it was intentional, but it didn't seem like it. || Tako ( bother me) || 21:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
In regards to the article Major film studio, I have attempted tell an IP editor that there isn't a conflict over Lionsgate, but the editor continues to revert ruining viewability of the full table and reinstating improper classificiation of some film units. I request page protection for the page, but was rebuffed being told to seek sanctions. So I am unsure where to go as the only sanction is article sanction, which I am not sure it fits. And I have an administrator that hold against me for even showing up at 3RR. What should I do? Spshu ( talk) 13:42, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for writing that article! One thing is that things need to be written in past tense (you would write in present tense if you are describing the plot of a fictional book/movie/etc).
Anyway I decided to beef up the Inkster school district page. They closed too... WhisperToMe ( talk) 00:37, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. You've participated in discussions on KCAL-TV. Can you offer your opinion about the inclusion of material in an article that's taking place in this consensus discussion, in which the reliability of that source is one of the issues that was raised (among others)? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 18:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
You moved the article on the comic from Pow! to Pow! (comic) and created a disambiguation page at its title, but you have not fixed the large number of incoming links to the comic which now point to the dab page. Please either fix all those links, or consider reverting your move and coping with the company and the album in a hatnote on the comic's article. It's your responsibility to clean up after creating a dab page in this way - there's a note to say so which appears during the move operation. Pam D 23:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Jeff Blake IS considered as one of the main key personnel in Sony Pictures. He is the executive vice chairman of the company. Read here Who are you to say that he is NOT?? 99.46.224.17 ( talk) 13:55, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and proposed that Iron Man: Rise of Technovore be split at Talk:Marvel Anime. Feel free to participate in the discussion. Also, the attempt to split seems to be entirely in good faith to me, and saying it isn't is quite rude to the person trying to split it. Keep in mind that it is normal for article content to be copied from one place in Wikipedia to another when things are split or merged, and that User:Raamin complied with the bare minimum requirements for copying content by listing the article it was copied from in the edit summary. Saying the information was "swiped" is inaccurate, as the copying of the information complied with Wikipedia guidelines. Also, please note WP:3RR, which states that it is against policy to revert an article more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. It looks like you reverted Iron Man: Rise of Technovore 4 times in the last 24 hours. Please don't edit war in that fashion. If you continue to do so, it is possible that you will be blocked from editing in the future. Calathan ( talk) 23:56, 23 January 2014 (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.
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
below this notice, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Bbb23 (
talk) 00:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Sorry, Bbb23, but it looks like you didn't bother to look at my defense at the ANI board. Can you, Bbb3, respond to Rammin over at Talk:Marvel_Anime#Proposed_split_of_Iron_Man:_Rise_of_Technovore that Ultimate Avengers 2 shouldn't exist and that I am working on Marvel Animated Features article in my user space and that what is happening with other articles isn't necessarily valid with others. But hay we would want to discussion any thing. Some times I think I can work it out with the other editor in vis via the edit summary and some times we have. And other ignore any discussion what so ever, so they can own the article. Spshu ( talk) 00:52, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Evrik. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Pinewood derby because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You may want to discuss such a major change first. -- evrik ( talk) 19:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Playhouse Disney may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
It's a "parent category", not "indirectly in that category". Please use standard wiki terminology in your edit summaries, OK? (thanks) Montanabw (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
There is an IP address who wants to talk about Citizens Republic Bancorp in the present tense even though the corporate entity no longer exists. Please monitor the article. Thank you. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 18:50, 27 February 2014 (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. DiverScout ( talk) 17:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Spshu, could you take another look at this edit of yours. There are a couple of grammatical issues and I don't want to take a stab at fixing it if I guess incorrectly. The first issue is "the Jim Henson Productions". That sounds odd. The second is "On April 1, 2004, the company and The Jim Henson Company..." I assume the first company is HiT? Thanks, not trying to be a smartass, just unsure of what you were getting at. Regards, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 23:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Frisbee (TV channel) is worthy of note, is one of the seven major channels for children italian television ( Source: Auditel Nielsen TAM); then Switchover Media no longer exists but was purchased and incorporated in Discovery Italia Srl.-- 79.9.17.139 ( talk) 19:03, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Independent Scout and Scout-like organizations in the United States, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth ( talk) 19:12, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of programs broadcast by Toon Disney.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE) 17:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I apologize that I haven't had a chance to find your edit, but I would like to discuss these edits here.
1. Please do not remove a website just because "website will most likely be shut down at some point" - Please don't do that. By removing the old website URL people who are not computer literate won't be able to find out where the old website was. Why is this important? Because we want people to be able to easily access the saved copies of the old websites.
The Wayback Machine at http://web.archive.org saves copies of old websites. http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/ is now dead. However... http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/ is very much accessible and people can learn about the old district by going through its webpages from the past. If you remove the old URL people may not know where the old website was. In this revision I added the links to the website archives.
2. Re: "image doesn't prove location just mailing address"
The edit was well meaning but it removed the citation. The image at http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/images/headers/1/header_19269963_c1353988139.jpg was the header of the website and it was stating the physical location address (which happens to be the mailing address).
Unfortunately, specifically that image cannot be viewed on the wayback machine: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/images/headers/1/header_19269963_c1353988139.jpg is blocked for some reason WhisperToMe ( talk) 05:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
1. This isn't our or my responsibility. If you want to link to the Wayback Machine then link via the Wayback Machine, don't come here and lecture me. Linking to the old website don't do them any good when they expect to click on them that they work.
2. No, the image citation places it in Saginaw ("705 N. Towerline Road, Saginaw, MI 48601") NOT Buena Vista Charter Township, the information it was suppose to be supporting. It is a general mistake that the mailing address is the physical location address. It just is the post office that deliveries the mail there as the GNIS FAQ 27 indicates: "Therefore, the ZIP Code boundary in no way indicates a legal “footprint” of a named community, is not official for purposes other than delivering mail, and changes periodically." So there for is NOT considered a reliable source for locations. Spshu ( talk) 19:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I wish to discuss your recent edits to these two templates. The reason those links are along the top of the templates is because they are the core articles for the subject. Your removal of them and substitution as section titles with less than descriptive titles makes it harder for people to understand what the link to. That is why I reverted your changes. If you feel that there is a substation reason why these changes should be made, please discuss it on the talk page per bold, revert and discuss.
Also, please do place allegations of unsubstantiated misuse of tools in your edit summaries, it goes against one of our central tenants of assuming good faith --- Jeremy ( blah blah • I did it!) 23:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I will admit that I too did not check the source links beforehand over at the Disk Wars page. However as the person citing that some of the info is unsourced, at least check if all of the source links have relevant info that can connect to the page. The T.M Revolution link also sources the kids and voice actors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.134.219 ( talk) 15:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I don't understand why you remove my contribution. I checked my sources and watched the show. So, I think I knows a thing or two about it too. Everybody is allowed to contribute to Wikipedia as long they don't make themselves nuisance. My english might not be 100% correct (because it's not my mother language) but I don't see anything wrong with adding a description in the character section about Captain America and Wasp. Have a nice day. comment add by 109.133.130.6 ( talk) 07:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Please read WP:NAC and WP:NACD. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 15:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I think the issue here is that you seem not to have noticed (correct me if I'm wrong here) that the lists are significantly different between the articles. Simply merging them would just not be possible. (I will admit, though, that I did not notice the date on that comment you mention - had I noticed it I might have held off closing the discussion a little longer.) Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 20:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jetix shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
You have begun an edit-war at Marvel Comics, going so far as to gratuitously label an edit you disagree with as "vandalism." It clearly was not, and was adhering to longstanding WPC practices. Before making a unilateral, undiscussed, over-the-top change affecting hundreds of articles, DISCUSS it, please, or I will ask an admin to intervene. WP:BRD, like it says above. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 13:57, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Please actually read what a citation links to before assuming you are right and undoing a valid edit. Check out the talk page for List of Avengers members. 86.184.121.147 ( talk) 20:39, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USDTV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lifetime ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:58, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Please stop reverting my edits. There are sources for the programming. There are many such as the Foxtel TV guide and the website. At least look on the TV guide for proof. 66.87.81.34 ( talk) 20:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Abbreviations can be confusing for readers (and until your edit there was no reference as to what they meant) that is why I initially spelled them out. It was for clarity. I still think that someday the abbreviations should be removed and everything spelled out. Wikicontributor12 ( talk) 22:11, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted the cast and crew list references for The 7D to point to the Disney press release on April 3, as that is the earliest of the articles to name the cast members for the show. The Animation World article was posted April 25 and rewords the press release. Similarly, Broadway World uses the press release information. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 17:32, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I understand that this network was rebranded ( FYI), but since the owner is the same and the Bio. page is short, there is no need for a new page. For examples of this Wikipedia tradition in play for recent rebrandings, see: CBS Sports Network, Destination America, Esquire Network, Fox Sports 2, TruTV, Velocity, and many others... -- Chris1294 July 8, 2014 16:37
Hi, it looks like someone's adding Jetix programs again for List of programs broadcast by Toon Disney. I remember they were spun off to the other article, but should they be listed in both places? - AngusWOOF ( talk) 16:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jetix shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD 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. AlanS ( talk) 19:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I haven't been following it lately since I've been trying to stay away from Ttll's disputes (they've been arguing over what to call an unaired show on Vortexx for the last month, whether unaired or other; I say unaired, they want other, I'm not going to get blocked for that so I withdrew). I personally implored for more sources when I created the RD for Xploration, but they're usually deaf ear notes. Nate • ( chatter) 01:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Regarding List of Disney XD TV channels, you didn't answer my question, how are you ordering the table? Also, could you please be more specific about what sourced information I removed? I am still hoping to improve the list. Thanks, 117Avenue ( talk) 02:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at KBJR-TV. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. There is a certain style and format that the majority of TV station articles use, particularly in regards to the infobox and presence of digital subchannels. Could you please STOP trying to force your practices under the guise of "cleanup"? ViperSnake151 Talk 15:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
The "group" you keep reverting it back to is at best just a paper-only division within SPE covering Columbia and maybe TriStar, and is NOT clearly referenced as the actual "parent" of ANY studio (much less Columbia). SPE is well-known as the immediate corporate parent of *ALL* of Sony's studio arms (including the lesser ones), and is well-documented as such (until late 2013 Columbia's logo used the tagline "A Sony Pictures Entertainment Company"; then it was shortened to "A Sony Company" like most of the others). SPE is the closest equivalent in Sony's corporate structure of most of the others listed in the "Studio Parent" column; the one most like CTMPG is Paramount Motion Pictures Group, but then there's not many alternatives in "new" Viacom's corporate structure between the parent & Paramount proper (especially after CBS got the TV side -- yes I know this is about films, but all the major studios except Paramount also shoot TV shows on their lots). Maybe YOU need to reconsider... -- RBBrittain ( talk) 05:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Your article, FYI (TV network) has been marked for speedy deletion because it covers a topic on which we already have a page – Fyi (TV network).
If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ViperSnake151 Talk 22:29, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I notice your one of the editors who won't give up the name Xploration Nation? I am begging you to correct this mistake and Fix the page. The 2 hour block for STEM Shows are called "Xploration Station". I work for Steve Rotfeld Productions. We just updated our website this week with all new information and new press links. You can easily see the Block is called Xploration Station and all the links refer you to the Xploration Social media sites. www.rotfeldproductions.com. My Boss is all upset that Wikipedia is having so much difficulty fixing this mistake. We changed the name of the block almost 4 months ago.
Mjay931979 ( talk) 20:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)mjay931979
I understand we only recently updated the site as of this week actually. I'm not saying Nation wasn't the name for a long time, we were selling it as Nation, but we found there was a problem with using the name Xploration Nation and we had to change it to Xploration Station. What would you consider a real source if none of what I suggested works? Links to social media sites? Our website is now updated and Xploration Station has it't own page. The press release you were using was from last year and at the time it was Xploration Nation, but the block is premiering the week of September 8th. There will be a lot more press in the coming weeks. If any of these work let me know. Mjay931979 ( talk) 11:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)mjay931979
Hey, thanks for the comments. Actually, I've found more searches relating to the public company, than the private LLC, on sites such as BusinessWeek. In any event, to have the LLC in the infobox and suggest the LLC is publicly traded is incorrect. -- Tærkast ( Discuss) 13:05, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I added the sources back that show that Xploration Animal Science and Animal Science are related. The Steve Rotfield page says that Xploration Animal Science is an Emmy-nominated show, but the news articles show that Animal Science is the one that received the nominations. Anyway I threw in a press kit link for season 1 for the Xploration Animal Science version to confirm the number of episodes and the start date. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 16:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I know I didn't agree with you in the past about removing news stations staff members, but I have recently decided to agree, and that it makes much more since. So with that being said, I've started to remove non-notable staff members (per WP:LISTPEOPLE) from the articles as well as unsourced titles/slogans. Right now, I have a user (User:Jamesbondfan) that keeps reverting my edits without a valid reason. I had left a message on his talk page today explaining why and a quote from User:Aoidh from the WIBW-TV talk page. I don't want to get in an edit war with this user, so I'm reaching out to you who is doing the same thing... removing non-notable staff. You know much more than I do about these kind of things and could probably explain it better than I could. As of right now (14:05 Central), Jamesbondfan has not replied back to me, just reverted edits. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 19:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Warner Bros. owns New Line Television the producer of that show — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.23.43 ( talk) 15:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
New Line Televion produces the series so its has be in the Cetegory Television series by Warner Bros. Television — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.23.43 ( talk) 13:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
regarding dario melendez there is a citation from the same place florida news journal blog and i'll even add the wisconsin/milwaukee journal centinal and his sacred heart profile to prove it
Your recent editing history at Duchy of Cornwall shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD 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. DuncanHill ( talk) 15:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Your edits to this article claim a notability issue but in neither case do you express why you believe it fails. Please illuminate me. — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 22:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
( ←) Obviously, I disagree and, if only barely, I'm not the only one. — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 18:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Also, if I may be so bold as to offer a couple of suggestions for future use:
Meantime, please consider archiving your talk page. If I click the wrong link and get the whole page (rather than this one section), it takes forever to load up and even longer to attempt editing. :D — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 22:18, 12 October 2014 (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.
Stop adding dated information on the active production deals section of the Warner Bros. Pictures page. If you keep adding dated and false info on that page, I will assume that you are a vandal and I will notify an administrator. ( StephenCezar15 ( talk) 21:04, 24 October 2014 (UTC))
Hello,
You recently reverted some changes to this page because of citations of the Grand Comicbook Database (GCD), which you marked as an unreliable source. The Reliable Sources Noticeboard had a conversation about the GCD in November of 2012 that seemed, in the end, to determine that there is sufficient editorial oversight for it to count as reliable: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_137#Grand_Comics_Database
Additionally, the Wikipedia editor Psyphics lists the GCD as one of his "Reliable sources for comic book articles" /info/en/?search=User:Psyphics#Reliable_sources_for_comic_book_articles per Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics Cleanup (which no longer seems to have such a list attached). Would you mind providing a source or precedent for your claims that the GCD is NOT a reliable source? I'm still new here, and such information would be valuable to me. Cheers, Mquillig ( talk) 15:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
you have been getting into too many arguments. You may in right about most of them, but that isn't the point. The point is how to improve WP articles effectively , and this is best done by making the effort to keep a calm tone, and accepting that you;re not going to win all arguments. Some of use find it helpful to avoid using the other party's name in an argument or discussion; certainly it is helpful never to accuse anyone of anything. Most of us find it helpful when discussing a major issue, to avoid bringing in peripheral or subsidiary issues, and to focus on the article only, not on prior matters. If people complains about what you are doing, stick to the matter at hand, not their manner or possible misbehavior. Personally, I have a rule that I follow 95% of the time, of only speaking twice in any dispute: I say what I have to say,and I answer any misunderstandings. If I haven't convinced people by then, I'm not likely to do any better if I continue. DGG ( talk ) 22:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd be careful if I were you. You don't want to get blocked all because of an edit war on the Warner Bros. article, do you?? King Shadeed 19:24, October 29, 2014 (UTC)
Show me a rule, where decades aren't allowed as a section for an article?? King Shadeed 21:01, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
All you do is erase accurate information, owner/parent lists on infoboxes, and formatting. So don't do that again please! 68.98.224.182 ( talk) 01:25, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Stop reverting the pages, Spshu! If you keep doing it, I'll notify an admin, otherwise all the useful information would be lost FOREVER! Plain and simple! 68.98.224.182 ( talk) 22:16, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
If I may, could you at least consider leaving notes on the worst pages you two are in conflict over? And could you please explain to me your side of the story, so I can decipher which of you two is in the right on any count? Because I wish to find a solution to the conflict as quickly as possible. Thanks! -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 00:46, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
If I may... why isn't Ken Shapiro listed on the MGM template as MGM's COO? Just wondering, is all. -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 04:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reversions you have made on
One Magnificent Morning. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
In addition, as part of your edit war, you are citing "source" material that has been found to be inaccurate. Your insistent citing and reposting of false source material as if it were "fact," is, by itself, grounds for being blocked. It is better to have no citation than any from false sources. If you continue to cite false source material, you may be blocked from editing, for this disruptive action as well, without further notice. IDriveAStickShift ( talk) 22:26, 14 December 2014 (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.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to United Artists may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:05, 23 December 2014 (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. 71.213.12.5 ( talk) 01:59, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 ( talk) 05:53, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
@ PhilKnight, Bbb23, JamesBWatson, and EdJohnston:
I am not using any IP in any attempt to contravene the block (all IP edits that I know of are were retag with a sig or listed here). I have been stopping a sock/IP loving editor that set a trap with a report of 3RR, which based on the edit summaries of Tt11213 amount to either a sock of his or quasi-vandalizer, who was pushing edits with out source, which I assume and revert with reason to force them to add a source or other appropriate action. The IP editor report me, so I complied with started a discussion to which Ttll213 edit with reversion and one with a source. Which I didn't notice, at first, which I admitted while indicating that it wasn't a reliable source. Meanwhile my counter report was too rote, thus ending up with my block.
Now it seems he has sprung a second phase attempting to get my block to a permanent band. He thus puts forth IP editors that agree with stopping the serial socker as my socks (note the filer reports himself).
Stop removing the dtv table and stop messing with the infobox as well! You are also violating WP:OWN by not letting anyone edit the page. 66.87.133.153 ( talk) 21:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
We do not put resolution/aspect ratio in infoboxes, they go in DTV tables. That's the way it's been, and that's the end of it! 2602:306:C5E4:24A0:2C13:7E54:4163:55C9 ( talk) 23:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Apparently, some local channels are distributed to other countries (Disney XD India, DXD Germany and Austria, DXD UK & Ireland) and some channels are for a group of countries (DXD Turkey, Middle East and Africa, DXD Asia), and some has different feeds (DXD US HD and SD-West, DXD+1 in some European countries, DXD+2 in Italy) and there are some channels that are a rip-off from existent channels (DXD ZA, DXD Scandinavian in Russian prove) and some channels don't exist (DXD Russia, which is a fanmade channel) Just saying. - Bankster1 ( talk) 22:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 03:20, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I note that you have reverted all of the edits I made to this article over the period of an hour and a half yesterday. This is unacceptable behaviour. At the very least, magazine titles are supposed to be in italics - at least fix those errors! Twofingered Typist ( talk) 14:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your edits to improve articles. Can you improve Nickelodeon (international), Boomerang (TV channel)#International, and List of international Cartoon Network channels similar to the way you did to Toon Disney, Disney Cinemagic, Jetix, Playhouse Disney, Disney Channels Worldwide, Disney Junior#List of Disney Junior versions, and List of Disney XD TV channels? Like adding sources, putting a summary table, and adding details?
Just saw an edit to a page I watch, and I saw something that surprised me. There is really a part of the Michigan statate constitution which allows for metropolitan government? Using this link, can you find the particular article? I'm really interested in this, and I bet most Michiganders didn't even know that this was a possibility. -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 08:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
One Magnificent Morning. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. 75.162.243.229 ( talk) 19:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Please take a look at the name of any Broadway theatre (there's a list in that article), and you will see it is spelled with "-re". Please take a look at the article on any prestiguous theatre company you've every heard of in NYC, and you'll see that it is almost invariably spelled "-re". ( Off-Broadway theatres, Off-Off Broadway) The tradition was long established in NYC -- one of the country's oldest cities -- well before the spelling change came about, and the theatres in the city (and in Boston and Providence and Philadelphia and most of the other older cities) use the "-re" spelling almost exclusively. The exception is movie theaters, which, for the most part, use the "-er" spelling unless they are converted vaudeville or legit theatres, in which case they invariable keep with the "-re" spelling. BMK ( talk) 21:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I need Spelling Premiere Network on WWOR! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.160.160.39 ( talk) 22:28, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Could somebody gave production deals on Universal Studios#Production deals page?
Why should gonna stay the Universal Studios#Production deals page as of 2012? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.217.120.32 ( talk) 00:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Swartz Creek Area Fire Department requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Zackmann08 ( talk) 22:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Swartz Creek Area Fire Department requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Zackmann08 ( talk) 21:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lin Sue Cooney. Since you had some involvement with the Lin Sue Cooney redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 00:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know I reverted your redirect at the above article. ALL high schools are considered notable. They do not have to meet gng or any other notability standard. They are notable by existence, just like geographic features. John from Idegon ( talk) 03:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Swartz Creek Area Fire Department is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swartz Creek Area Fire Department until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon ( talk) 18:59, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swartz Creek Area Fire Department, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. You have no way to know my motivation for anything I do. Did I discover this NN article by looking at your talk page? Yes. How does it follow that I did ANYTHING in "retaliation"? Remove your attack from the above article immediately or I will take you to ANI. Your editing is very tendentious. John from Idegon ( talk) 19:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
The Disney archive website is actually a very reliable and respected animation site for all the cancelled movies. It's very interesting and it deserves to stay there.
The article for the GOTG TV show should be moved back to the main space, making it a user page makes zero sense. Please move it to the main space. Npamusic ( talk) 21:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to La chaîne Disney, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 19:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
CARTT.ca is per the about page a one man website thus has no editorial oversite (" Cartt.ca is run by an experienced ::journalist.." from its about page) and hidden behind a subscription makes it difficult for me or any one else to confirm. Thus a substitution of a source that every one can confirm says. Primary are not strictly forbidden, they should definitely be removed when a general media new source is found that can source the same information. As per primary source, the WP article should not rely on them thus a major of the sources should not be primary sourced.
Typically, re-brandings of this nature do not get separate articles unless there is a major ownership change with a complete change in scope that is significant and detailed enough for its own article (i.e. Al Jazeera America), or the new network is technically and legally distinct from the previous one (Fox Sports 1). ViperSnake151 Talk 23:34, 1 August 2014+
See here and here. Airplaneman ✈ 22:56, 17 August 2015 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: ). Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Your assumption that this site was inherently unreliable because it is a "one-man band" seemed a bit questionable, so I did some digging and found more information about the author. He's worked at least 16 years as an independent telecommunications journalist and has had his sites described as "must-reads in the industry", and has been involved with industry functions (he moderated a panel at a Canadian telecom industry summit and cited by CBC in coverage of it). He does seem to have credentials and connections, so I guess in good faith we can assume that he is a reliable source. ViperSnake151 Talk 21:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
This website is absolutely a reliable source; there cannot be any reasonable doubt regarding this. Also, it is not completely unreadable without subscription, as it allows one free article before blocking readers. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 18:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Determining whether or not it is a reliable source is what the paywall is preventing. Spshu ( talk) 16:15, 26 August 2015 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Mdrnpndr (Result: ). Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 09:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Please don't, as you just did here and here. If you want to revert minor tidying up edits, whether made by me or anyone else, a good reason would help. N-HH talk/ edits 13:41, 26 August 2015 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Mdrnpndr (Result: ). Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 16:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Swarm ♠ 03:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Show me what guideline make it improper to create such a list, @ Bbb23:? This seems to part of Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks "that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead; or:"
Don't forget that you were the one to fall for the sock puppet that tricked you in banning me for stopping another disruptive editor. I had to post that while under your block. I should have appeal that block, but the guideline seem circular - admit you did it which should thus lock in your punishment, since you admit your guilt. Then not do it again - no one can guarantee that will not run into another disruptive editor. I have been a productive contributor and made productive edits that have turned into edit wars like the one I just got block for. 84.9% of edits have been on articles or templates. Sorry, you can not assume good faith thus unblock me or even offer an apology. I don't see your need to purposefully harass me by edit warring on my talk page. Spshu ( talk) 00:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 00:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
I think you may want to archive your talk page by creating a new page called User talk:Spshu/Archive 1, then move the content of this talk page to that, and blank your current talk page for reuse. 1.) So it doesn't crash on old computers. 2.) I think there's a kilobyte limit on how much kilobytes can be included in the filesize of a page, which I saw on another MediaWiki, where I got an error saying I can't edit the page because I was going over the kilobyte limit. - EvilLair ( ✉ | c) 00:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello Spshu, Within the past hour I made edits to the Citizens Republic Wikipedia Page. I updated generic references to the bank to be more descriptive (i.e. it may have said Citizens but should have said Citizens National Bank). Could you clarify why you reverted all of those changes back to an earlier version? Thank you. Druedavid ( talk) 20:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Please stop removing shows from the program list without sufficient reason. I don't know what you mean by indiscriminate. Plus, these shows are sourced to ARCHIVED TV schedules which are reliable. Gatordragon ( talk) 21:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
You removed American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. as the corporate name for the TV network from the article for American Broadcasting Company (a.k.a. ABC) TV network. Your reason, or, in my opinion, excuse, for doing so was
American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. may be a IP holding co. or production holding co.
even though I previously stated that, in the ending credits for the TV show General Hospital (a.k.a. GH), the copyright notice states: © (Year) American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.. Now, after looking up the article for GH, in the show's infobox, it does indeed list the ABC TV network as the production & distribution company for the show. So, judging by that, one could then infer that American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. IS in fact the ABC TV network's corporate name. Another time that I re-inserted the corporate name, you said
see American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres for ABCompanies, Inc., the former AB-PT
Well, according to THAT article, the network was eventually known as ABCompanies, Inc. (as you referred to it) before taking on the name ABC Television, Inc. on July 8, 1986, while on that same date, a second company taking on the name ABCompanies, Inc. was formed. However, 3 years later, ABC Television was dissolved, which would then leave the new ABCompanies as the network's name. (the article for AB-PT has been edited to correlate with the information currently present/ed in the article for ABC)
Now, the thing is, ALL TV networks are businesses. And, businesses have corporate (or legal, according to Wikipedia) names (as well as some having trade names, which are indicated by DBA). CBS's corporate name is CBS Broadcasting, Inc., NBC's is NBCUniversal, Inc., The CW The CW Network, LLC, Fox (or FOX, depending on your preference) Fox Broadcasting Company, LLC, MyNetwork TV MyNetworkTV, Inc., & Ion Television Ion Television, Inc.. In the case of the ABC TV network, ABC, Inc. (d.b.a. Disney-ABC Television Group) wouldn't be the corporate name for the network, as that is actually ABC's parent company, similar to CBS Corp as CBS's parent, NBCU as NBC's, Fox Entertainment Group as Fox's, & Ion Media Networks as Ion Television's.
In fact, if you need anymore proof that the information I had inserted into the article is indeed correct, look up documentation for the court case Aereo is involved in against CBS, NBC, ABC, & Fox. In the documentation, ABC is listed by its corporate name, American Broadcasting Companies, Inc..
So, to conclude my little rant here, unless you can provide indisputable proof from a legitimate, credible source (like I did by linking to the Bloomberg Business profile for ABCompanies in the article or mentioning Aereo's court case here) that shows ABC as being anything other than American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., I expect you to re-insert American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. as the network's corporate name at your earliest convenience. 76.235.248.47 ( talk) 04:43, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Better yet, since you're probably (still) a little shaken up from the schooling I put you through, I'll re-insert the information myself, using a reference from the official website for the US Supreme Court, which should suffice as a legitimate, credible source for the information. 76.235.248.47 ( talk) 02:46, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Within the entertainment industry, "ABC Entertainment" is more often understood to mean the ABC network division responsible for ordering and scheduling. Nevertheless, the network does not produce entertainment programming.
←ABC Inc DBA Disney-ABC is not similar to CBS Corporation's Showtime Networks, etc. (off the top of my head, the only similar unit is Fox Networks Group) as they don't hold the broadcast properties, but lets move on. Just stating that you think American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. is American Broadcasting Company network is not proof. Nor is copyright proof. Disney-ABC can assign authorship thus copyrights to any subsidiary they want to (as they do on the film side with Disney Enterprises, Inc. and its subsidiaries like WALT DISNEY FEATURE ANIMATION FLORIDA, INC. that actually author/produce the works); they do not have to assign it to its network operating unit. I have seen ABC shows copyrighted by ABC Studios, so there is some probability that ABCos might be ABC Studios, but I have no proof. So, that there are suits filed against ABCos as they are likely over show issues, so that makes sense since Disney-ABC has designated it as copyright holder for most of its shows. That doesn't proof that it is the network. Disney Co. itself has been sued in those same cases (as are ABC, Inc. and Disney Enterprises). For example: “Life in a Glass House” case: "ABC’s parent company, The Walt Disney Co., is also named as a defendant to the copyright-infringement case, .." "American Broadcasting Companies, Disney Enterprises, ABC dba Disney/ABC Television Group, and ABC’s in-house production company, Keep Calm and Carry On Productions, are also named defendants."
You have not proven me wrong. It is tiresome, since you do not offer any proof and seeming retread the same info and finally actually indicate that you don't have proof. Well if I don't have a brain then you would consider no one to have a brain. One can infer base on what you have offer. It is possible that only insiders to ABC-Disney might know what the corporate name for the ABC TV network is and not by any research. Ranting on like any one on WP is going to stop you if you actual have proof and their is some great conspiracy. I have run into individual that block adding sourced information do that but no great conspiracy on WP against it. You want me ban because you don't have proof? I have been attempt to hunt down Walt Disney Studios' corporate form to no available, it might be considered Disney Enterprises, Inc. but other than it holds all pre-CC/ABC merger assets at that time and that it has all copyrights outside of Marvel, Lucasfilms, ABC and Pixar isn't enough to even say that Disney Enterprises owns Disney Studios. Spshu ( talk) 15:42, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
The documentation says its specifically for dates displayed within tables, yet you seem to insist on displaying all dates in articles, even if in body text, through it. ViperSnake151 Talk 06:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I'm not sure if you saw my edit summary at List of Avengers members, but Secret Wars is not an alternate universe. It is the result of a convergence of all the Marvels universes, and the current status quo. Besides A-Force is scheduled to continue into All-New All-Different Marvel, the next phase of the MU after Secret Wars.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
You may also want to see this relevant discussion on Fortdj33's talk page.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello Spshu. I see that you recently undid my undo on Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, telling me to look in the talk page to see why you did so. However, the only mention of Disney Regional Entertainment I see on Talk:Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is at the top, where the template says that DRE's history was copied or moved into Parks and Resorts, citing an edit from 2011. However, that doesn't seem to be all that relevant to my reasoning to undo your initial edit. If you are talking about something else in the talk page, please provide a link to it. Thanks Elisfkc ( talk) 17:55, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that you reverted the changes in the Star Television Network article back to your latest version. The main reason why I made the edits in the first place is to improve the overall quality of the article (excessive bolding is frowned upon at Wikipedia), corrected a callsign (the Sarasota (actually Venice) affiliate was " WBSV-TV", not "WSBV-TV"), added stations that were affiliated with Star according to other articles (see KPXM-TV, KXLT-TV and WMNT-CD), and made a note that two of the stations signed on after the network folded (WBSV and WTTA). Reverting your article back to your version and discounting all the corrections is considered Wikipedia:Ownership of content, which is against Wikipedia rules. Also, if you are contesting any information, look it up and provide a source, don't just delete it wholesale. Thanks for your cooperation. -- azumanga ( talk) 22:42, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
What's the problem? Stop outright deleting articles without any discussion. ViperSnake151 Talk 02:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Katie talk 00:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Spshu ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hey I did not even get a chance to respond at AfD. I was not disruptive I was being disrupted by Electricburst1996. Secondly, I requested attempt a discussion which he removed from the talk page. Previous history of blocks and edit warring are even suppose (as I understand it) to be use as that is the only way for the blocking administrator, KrakatoaKatie, to jump to your conclusion. Did you bother to note that a few block were done to me for an administrator's co-project mate (no reason given as his co-project was 3RR too), another was through gaming the system by a sock puppet with another disruptive editor and another because administrators refused to do a page protect to get the other editor to the discussion page (despite block notices stating "and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection." And most 3RR reports were frivolous. When looking have even bother to note that Electricburst1996 has reverted 4 times now with basic your permission. That is interest that Electricburst1996 does not bring up his block log and has 1 block in 2 years compared effective less constructive ones.
Electricburst1996 edits: 1. 22:45, 10 December 2015 Laff (TV network) (Undid revision 694690524 by Spshu (talk) Source or no source, no one but you has expressed any problem with this section.)
2. 23:20, 10 December 2015 Laff (TV network) (Reverted 1 edit by Spshu: Take it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television if you want to complain. None of the other subchannel network articles' programming lists have sources, either. (TW))
3. 23:25, 10 December 2015 Laff (TV network) (Reverted 2 edits by Spshu (talk). (TW))
Decline reason:
Whatever the problems with Electricburst1996's conduct, your unblock request is not the place to raise them. See WP:NOTTHEM. You seem to be unable to take responsibility for your actions on Wikipedia. You were once blocked "because administrators refused to do a page protect"? Seriously? Huon ( talk) 01:49, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hello, I just thought I would say again re FYI (U.S. TV channel) that not all blogs are unreliable sources, per WP:BLOGS and similar Wikipedia guidelines. I note that you reverted your own edit, reinstating the citation, so thank you. The website is widely used across Wikipedia and references in mainstream media also. If it bothers you that much, you're welcome to find your own citation from another source if you prefer. Thanks, -- Whats new? (talk) 01:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Spshu. Since ABC Family rebranded to Freeform on January 12, 2016, it is no longer owned by ABC Family Worldwide, Inc.. But Freeform will air on family-oriented series and feature films (including the Disney animated film), but will never air—such as the Marvel Productions libarary (which was now owned by Marvel Entertainment), the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers and Digimon franchise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.21.108.200 ( talk) 01:31, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
There is MAJOR clean-up necessary in the "Notable examples" section of the article:
<snip> - remove corrections wanted
I've tried changing the table myself recently, but a couple editors reverted my edits. So, maybe if you make the changes, there won't be the threat of a revert. 2602:304:CEBF:82F0:645A:700:3028:AE00 ( talk) 08:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Flint water crisis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- allthefoxes ( Talk) 20:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
question... If the table is sortable, then what is the difference? Just difference... - theWOLFchild 00:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted the Disney's Hollywood Hotel article. I was wondering how it was not notable, since it is every result I see on Google and it is a Disney hotel. Currently, it is the only Disney resort without an article. Elisfkc ( talk) 21:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to
United States federal executive departments: you may already know about them, but you might find
Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the
sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a
vandal when they've been previously warned.
Also, you may also want to consider archiving your talk page, as it's becoming quite lengthy and unwieldy. Please see
"Help: Talk page archiving". Thank you -
theWOLFchild 15:10, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
From IGN: "Legion centers on the story of David Haller, the alleged son of Professor X who was previously diagnosed with Schizophrenia before realizing his supposed illness was actually something more.
Landgraf said this potential series won't take place within the X-Men film universe." "It's not in the continuity of those films in the sense the current X-Men films take place in a universe in which everybody on planet Earth is aware of the existence of mutants," he said. "The series Legion takes place in a parallel universe, if you will, in which the US government is in the early days of being aware that something called mutants exist but the public is not. I wouldn't foresee characters moving back and forth because they really are parallel universes."
Since Legion is part of neither the MCU or X-Men film series, the current notation system in the article is appropriate. - Richiekim ( talk) 13:16, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Early today you twice removed an IMDB reference from The Inspectors (TV series), with reasons "is show" and " Wikipedia:Citing IMDb". I do not believe that either of these are good reasons to remove the reference. Wikipedia:Citing IMDB is an opinion essay, not policy or a guideline, and this use case is not even in its list of inappropriate uses. The show has premiered, so its cast list is static and not WP:CRYSTAL. I would appreciate if you would please undo your removal of the reference, or allow me to do so. Mamyles ( talk) 20:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeffrey Brohn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Brohn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat ( talk) 06:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Melvin P. McCree is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melvin P. McCree until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat ( talk) 06:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Apparently our resolved content dispute over Valiant Comics has boiled over to Pendant Productions.
I thoroughly followed the procedures laid out in WP:UNDUE and WP:PRIMARY in order to correct the issues you highlighted with Valiant Comics, and I replicated those procedures to fix the same issues you noted on Pendant Productions. And yet, your more recent edit summary states "(notability (no major media coverage), fix ibox formating, rmv. self sourcing info)."
Is the BBC not major media coverage??? Not to mention, most small, independent companies don't have wide press coverage. (Don't believe me, just take a look at the page for Earwolf, another podcasting company.} The ibox formatting follows Wikipedia:Infobox procedures to a tee. All of the self-sourced info was removed; and in compliance with WP:PRIMARY, Kickstarter does not constitute a primary source.
Then you stick a Wikipedia:Notability box at the top of the page, thoroughly ignoring the four sources established in the content you removed. And in the instances where more reliable sources were needed to replace primary or outdated sources, I added Citation Needed boxes to try and establish even MORE notoriety.
WP:DR provides the proper guidelines to handle this dispute. Wikipedia policy states don't delete salvageable text. For example, if an article appears biased, add balancing material or make the wording more neutral. Include citations for any material you add. You did none of this in your edits. Instead of following this procedure, you're throwing content to the wind and flagging a 9 year old Wiki entry for notability.
To say the least, I'm frustrated. But I want to do right and resolve this without filing a proper dispute. My request is that we compromise by reverting your last edit and adding Citation Needed notes where required to help other editors establish notoriety. If you just delete information on a whim, you'll never give editors a chance to correct the issue. -- Bmanpa ( talk) 23:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey man, I would appreciate it if you stop deleting the programming list for the page for Disney XD Australia and New Zealand. I've provided several sources for the list and all of the shows that are listed there are actually airing if you take a look at the schedule. I've put my time into making the list and I'm already getting mad because you wasted all of my time and efforts. So please stop doing this. If you want to talk about it more just PM me. But for now, can you at least keep the programming list on the DXD AUS/NZ page please?
Until then, good day to you sir!
Regarding this edit (and more particularly its summary), please see WP:INFOBOXREF. It's actually pretty common knowledge and an extension of WP:LEADCITE. I wouldn't characterize that as edit warring at all, as Afterwriting was making a substantially different edit each time, but also making a fix to meet INFOBOXREF at the same time. oknazevad ( talk) 16:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fifty State Initiative is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fifty State Initiative until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MSJapan ( talk) 03:16, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Toon_Disney
Please, I want a Toon Disney change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2F0E:70A3:BF00:16CC:20FF:FE12:405C ( talk) 20:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi. The article does not say that Boulder Media is a division of Hasbro Studios. In Variety says nothing about Hasbro Studios. Carefully read the article. "Cullen and his team will report to Hasbro’s (!) chief content officer, Stephen Davis". Davis is Hasbro’s chief content officer (and not only the President of Hasbro Studios). NightShadow ( talk) 15:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
It is in the official press release: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160713006391/en/Hasbro-Acquires-Boulder-Media-Animation-Studio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.235.106 ( talk) 22:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. – Darkwind ( talk) 01:12, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
@ Darkwind:, sorry, but I don't understand this block. You claimed that I reverted over 3 times at Hasbro Studios. 1) I did not. Please, actually check the history log. I made no edit between his third and forth edits. Even Electricburst1996 only reports 3 reversals And two, he was being disruptive over the source was not even editing out Hasbro Studios owning Boulder Media thus even his first reversal should cause him to be blocked. He even agreed that the Variety source was preferred over tformers.com which he continual placed back into Hasbro Studios (for Hasbro Studios ownership of Boulder Media). Yes, that is the extend of his edits until his fourth edit, which he used just me being reported at AN3 as reason to start up the content edit war at Hasbro Studios ( See WP:AN3#User:Spshu reported by User:Electricburst1996 (Result: )) which was not before; it was basically disruptive editing. With disruptive editing, it does matter who is right and who is wrong.
This was the text that he was reverting to: "On July 13, 2016, Hasbro Studios acquired Irish animation studio Boulder Media.[10]" tformers.com This was the text that I was returning (or some thing similar) to: "On July 13, 2016, Hasbro Studios acquired Irish animation studio Boulder Media. Boudler (sic) would continue operating separately under its current name under its chief content officer Stephen Davis." ref: Schwindt, Oriana (July 13, 2016). "Hasbro Acquires Dublin-Based Animation Studio Boulder Media". Variety. Retrieved July 14, 2016. (edit summary: "sorry but Variety is a better source & you are removing content for no reason")
He was being disruptive at Boulder Media remove other sourced information as I had sourced the whole article as it was self sourced or unsource and hatnoted as such. I warned him in the edit summary that he should not drag that into the argument over Hasbro Studios/Hasbro ownership of Boulder. ( do not remove other content & sourcing not related to Hasbro/Hasbro Studios issue). He was removing -1,218 characters (or bytes) that is more than 7 characters the length of "Studios".
I guess I should not revert any vandalism or distributive editing/editors as they may just reverse it? As Electroburst will see this as a green light to report me for reverting vandalism (since he has been more or less stalking me). I guess I have to pledge not to stop distributive editors and/or get them to see the errors of their ways.
Administrator @ Ymblanter: even pointed out to Nightshadow: "No, you are clearly wrong on this point. You made four reverts on the same page ( Hasbro Studios) today. Everybody can check the history. 4 > 1-2."
As far as my previous blocks, no administrator that has do so been able to adequately give reasons for the block, administrator refused to page protect articles or have been shown to have been duped. One by a pair of socks, the other by Electricburst1996 (see: User talk:Spshu#December_2015, User_talk:Spshu#ANI notification 2 & Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive908#Long-term edit warring and personal attacks by User:Spshu which turned in to a boomrang). Spshu ( talk) 15:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert."
— Wikipedia:Edit warring (emphasis in original)
@ JBnAZ: - sorry I can not respond on the talk page at this time.
Hello, Spshu/Archive 1 thank you for your recent contributions on articles related to amusement parks. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Amusement Parks, a WikiProject which aims to improve the quality of all amusement park related articles on Wikipedia. Feel free to stop by to learn more and sign up at the Participants page. Hope to see you over there! GoneIn60 ( talk) 13:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Spshu, you are hoaxing this page. Stop wasting our time or you will be blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.46.87 ( talk) 17:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC) NOt so see: Talk:Ready Player One (film)#Production_companies. Spshu ( talk) 17:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
I just got your deletion proposal for Marvel Super Hero Adventures: Frost Fight! If you want to have people debat it's deletion, might I suggest starting a n Arcles for Deletion discussion. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 20:43, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doc talk 08:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Defunct Scout and Scout-like organizations in the United States shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Frietjes ( talk) 13:53, 27 September 2016 (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. Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 18:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
You appear to be engaged in a edit war and WP:3RR applies. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 14:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, can I ask why you redirected the Hulk: Where Monsters Dwell article? You mentioned that it wasn't notable, but all films are notable enough to have their own articles as long as there's enough references. More reviews and other details about the film are now coming online so the article can be greatly improved if it goes back up. The Editor 155 ( talk) 23:37, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you chose to use the undo button when your change ultimately did not revert my change. Is there a specific reason you chose this action? - DinoSlider ( talk) 16:43, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding edit warring. The discussion is about the topic Coney Island hot dog. Thank you. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 17:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:27, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi. The cast members you removed from Hulk: Where Monsters Dwell had come from the credits of the film where they weren't listed on the source as the other ones. I'm just letting you know that. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 16:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Proposed deletion notices can be removed by anyone. Once removed, they must not be restored. Spinning Spark 01:17, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Stop inserting non full articles in the template. Redirects and sections are useless in a template because the entire point of them is to connect stand-alone articles, not to tell the reader everything about the team/series/artist. If you want to add them back split them into separate articles. ★Trekker ( talk) 15:02, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heroes & Icons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charge!. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:48, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just want to say that I'm sorry for the conflict recently. I acted pretty immature and overreacted to a simple misunderstanding and I'm sorry for that. I've thought it over and I realize that I need to think over situations more before I react and that I'm too agressive many times. I haven't felt great recently in my life and I'm was not acting mature at all. I hope you understand that I sincerely regret how I acted. You were probably right for the most part and I lashed out due to having a bruised ego. I can't remember exactly everything that was said latest but I hope I didn't insult you or offend you. ★Trekker ( talk) 12:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate you changing the labels, but I'm not seeing that data in the displayed infobox. I'm not sure what the issue is. :( Naraht ( talk) 19:10, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Disney Channel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Northern Lights. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to ABC Daytime, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Digifan23 ( talk) 23:35, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited MGM Television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NBC Studios. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
This edit war over Animation studios owned by The Walt Disney Company has got to stop so I'm following Wikipedia guidelines by trying to reach a consensus with you. I'm letting you know that I kept most of your contributions, but placed them in parenthesis. I'm not sure placing "(primary production company)" is really necessary alongside Lilo & Stitch and Brother Bear since the Disney direct-to-video sequels that were produced solely in Australia and Canada don't need to have that on the article. However, you need to stop being sensitive when someone changes your writing and carrying on an nonconstructive nature. As others have suggested, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies and guidelines on the welcome page. We improve and revise upon each other's writing.
Again, I'm sorry I didn't recognize what you were trying to do, but I feel it's useful since most of the Feature Animation films were often produced in two or three countries. Christianster94 ( talk) 20:21, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
This message template was placed here by Yashovardhan Dhanania, a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. You recently filed a request or were a major party in the DRN case titled " Talk:Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer#Semi-protected edit request on_3_March_2017". The case is now closed: no relevant discussion found at article talk page. Please discuss at talk page before filing DRN. If you are unsatisfied with this outcome, you may refile the DRN request or open a thread on another noticeboard as appropriate. If you have any questions please feel free to contact this volunteer at his/ her talk page or at the DRN talk page. Thank you! -- Yashovardhan ( talk) 21:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cheddar (TV channel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Homebrew. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits to Spider-Man Strikes Back.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Total-Truth-Teller-24 ( talk) 22:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits to Spider-Man: The Dragon's Challenge.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Total-Truth-Teller-24 ( talk) 22:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
In the future, please be more careful with your warnings. In concerns to the AFD where we crossed paths, your warning was pretty off-base. Yes, editors are encouraged to comment on content, not editors, but they are free to comment on "editor's understanding of policy or Wikipedia on a whole", which is different. The warning you gave would be more appropriate for off topic complaining about, or attacking of, another editor. That is far from what I did. I was notifying you that you were misunderstanding and misrepresenting a WikiProject-level consensus, which is far from being " disruptive".
Also, probably probably read up on this as well. Its generally considered bad form to regurgitate template warnings to experienced editors. You...acknowledged I was an Admin at the end bit of your "warning", so it would seem you'd understand my experience level to some capacity.
Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
I left a few comments for you at Talk:Warner Bros. World Abu Dhabi. I'm just leaving this here to make sure you notice them. Bruzer Fox 14:02, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
You were right to revert my edit at Universal Pictures. "founders=" does work in the info box. I thought the change of "founder=" to "founders=" was just random vandalism. Thanks. John Nagle ( talk) 20:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
You asked for a citation for the name change. I added the source directly from the league itself and its reasoning. This is directly allowed by WP:PRIMARY as it is a straightforward statement with interpretation.What was on there before read like WP:OR without it. As for the league name, I couldn't care less (although the League's statement is "as of the 2017–18 season, we are know as the G-League", just because their website hasn't changed over has not changed that fact). In the end, you put citation needed, I gave a citation. Please stop your reverting. Yosemiter ( talk) 15:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Maybe instead of deleting or tagging unsourced statements, you should try actually finding a source. I am tired of finding them for your concerns and reverting things known to be true. Just because someone was lazy years ago when the article was edited does not give you an excuse to be as well. (The Asheville to Tulsa sources took me about one minute to find both a post from Ashville in 2005 and post from Tulsa about the 66ers history). And as to the name at the top, at least two other editors have named it G-League before me, I took that as a consensus to change. If you disagree, it is well beyond time to take it to the Talk page as you have hit your WP:3RR. Thank you, Yosemiter ( talk) 01:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Spshu ( talk) 15:48, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, like you did at WGN-TV, you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Now remember that. AdamDeanHall ( talk) 21:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Regarding [[Swartz Creek, Michigan], it basically means that you'd need full-fledged natural language processing to determine which is the correct one to update, as it's highly context-dependent (not so hard for a human but requires heavy machinery for a script).
Since there are only 2 years with populations specified (one of which doesn't show up on the Template:US Census Population anyway because it's not from a Census year), I'd really prefer to have the population numbers for those years listed in prose and have the lone historical population table be the one for Swartz Creek. Is this okay with you? If not, let me know why and what a better solution will be to this problem. DemocraticLuntz ( talk) 19:27, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I do not understand your adamancy to remove the clearly identified subsidiaries and divisions of DCPI? The article is about a company, said company has clear divisions and subsidiaries. You're withholding information for the infobox. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 20:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reversions you have made on One Magnificent Morning. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively,you may be blocked from editing. Dear; Spshu you are being really selfish on Wikipedia every time me and others edit HiT Entertainment it's saved and all of a sudden you come back and remove info from me and other users you should respect other people's opinions I'm NOT a bad user, You're a know it all and should learn important stuff plus anyone can edit Wikipedia plus you type things like, don't add anymore, or whatever else you should believe us and I'm sorry for typing this and you should accept our edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TTTEFan2017 ( talk • contribs
This is a conversation that I had with a moderator, and he elaborated on Marvel Comics different incarnations.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not making assumptions on your knowledge of Marvel Comics, quite the opposite actually. I wanted to get a clear understanding about what is regarded as the origins of Marvel Comics. I think the confusing comes from the fact that Atlas was renamed Marvel Comics and Magazine Management was renamed Marvel Comics Groups. I used the discussion with @ Tenebrae: as the basis for validating my edits, but hey, if that information is incorrect that I'm okay with it getting clarified. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 19:03, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
We apologize to modify the 1961–62 United States network television schedule (weekday) and 1962–63 United States network television schedule (weekday) pages. The CBS News program Calendar was actually aired at 7:00am, and local programming aired at 11:30am on the CBS lineup. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:2999:5568:F4E:F76F ( talk) 02:49, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
We are talking about the defunct syndication company "Weiss Global Enterprises", which distributed movies as well as The Danny Thomas Show. The assets were to sold to SFM in the mid 1990s. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A9DF:3418:D59D:A504 ( talk) 03:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
So we meet again for the wrong reason. Please DO NOT delete factual info. I added the citation you said was missing. The proper thing to do is to add a 'citation needed' tag regarding edits which are true, but uncited. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 20:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
This is ridiculous. You're not taking TV Guide and Zap2It, but you're accepting some random database TV Tango which says on top that it references IMDB.com and TV.com which are unreliable sources, and has a tab to Zap2It? The show exists and it is airing on Disney XD and has sources to back it up. If you need to wait for Disney XD to verify their DXPOfficial Twitter account, then fine, I have provided sources for TV Guide and Zap2It. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 21:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
They're not in the same line of business as Timely Comics, and they both have different parent companies. Just because two companies have a similar name doesn't mean that they should be in the same article. The not to be confused with link exists for a reason. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 12:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Spshu, you stopped being collaborative when you intentionally removed my response to you. And by the way, I can report you for edit warring with my edits, this is a two way street and not a one way service. Fact of the matter is, making a list with two unaffiliated business just doesn't makes sense, it's not like Animation studios owned by The Walt Disney Company or Timely Comics in which all the entities mentioned in the article are in the same line of business, it's just two companies who have the name Marvel Music. Their association with Marvel with both companies is entirely different. There is no validation to merge them. What I'm noticing here is that you're adamant for an article to be filled to the brim with citations, otherwise it's not valid in your eyes. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 18:43, 26 July 2017 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: ). Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 19:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to KXTV, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 23:56, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
My edits of KXTV were indeed constructive, unlike your edits, which are hard to read. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:09, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
You just reverted this change I made to Great Officer of State. Can you explain the rationale? There are no other instances that I am aware of where a citation to a standard reference work (such as EB1911, EB9, CathEnc) includes the access date, because the text will never change. The only point, I believe, of an access date is to defend against a citation that could change, and sources like these will never change other than to correct typos in the online rendition etc. It's redundant and noisy.
Your reversion also removed the list of secondary sources cited by the encyclopedia (it's standard practice to include these for anyone who wants to dig deeper), the volume/page (again, standard practice for EB1911 and friends), at least one footnote that is not relevant to the tagged text, and a "wstitle" that points to an article that isn't in wikisource (Treasury), thus introducing a link error. So while I would certainly prefer to lose the accessdates, these other items (and some wording improvements) certainly should stay.
@ PBS:, would you care to opine? David Brooks ( talk) 23:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
{{
EB1911}}
, {{
DNB}}
, etc do not need access dates for the reason DB has given, see the conversation at
template talk:London Gazette#deprecated parameters for a recent comment on this by yet another editor.{{
EB1911}}
Your experience with you pushing your style isn't relevant, DB. You claim that volume/page is "desirable", but reject access dates, but "desirable" doesn't make required. You never seen an access date when that standard in the cite templates. Access date is an allowed field of EB1911.
Casual readers are going to care most likely about any additional sourcing. Listing these sources imply that EB1911 is not a reliable source.
Re the Treasury article, I have been aware contrary to Public Broadcasting System's and your assumption the difference between wstitle and url. Perhaps I prefer to link to WikiSource regardless, as perhaps I intended to get the article up there. It is like adding a red link knowing that at some point such an article would be created. Instead, you divert it else where. I had use lovetoknow or some other EB1911 site to link to, only to have it remove EB1911 or shut down. Treasury article is now up at wikisource. So in effect, you have made that edit for little to no reason. (Except that it save me some time in finding the page at archive.org.) Spshu ( talk) 21:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
{{
One source}}
.{{
EB1911}}
or {{
cite EB1911}}
templates, because it will give false positives to the maintenance categories under
Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, and so an editor deliberately adding links via the parameter wstitle to EB1911 articles on Wikisource that do not exist, and who is aware of the maintenance templates (and that other editors use them for maintenance), will be seen as disruptive. --
PBS (
talk) 15:41, 12 August 2017 (UTC)You wrote on my talk page:
My initials. It is only misleading if you are an American! In the UK the Public Broadcasting service is called the BBC, In Australia ABC, in Canada CBC and New Zealand TVNZ. -- PBS ( talk) 12:50, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
BTW this talk page is way too big. You should consider setting up an auto-archive see help:archive#Automated archival for how to do that. -- PBS ( talk) 12:52, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Read two magazine issues "Viacom World Wide" and list every title Viacom distributed by the point, including ones not distributed by Viacom and ones already distributed by Viacom.
Source this: [35] [36] -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:4911:2003:5D8D:EDC2 ( talk) 03:42, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Marvel Music now re-directs to a sub-section of Marvel Studios. Now you can bespoke the article to your whimsy to meet notability. You can take this opportunity to sample anything from Music of the Marvel Cinematic Universe that will be relevant to Marvel Music Inc. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 23:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The use of "channel" and "network" is seriously quite confusing, but a simple guideline is to see if the brand in question has both a broadcast and a web streaming presence. For example, 'fyi' has both a live broadcast sent over cable, dish, etc. and operates a streaming service. Streaming is another "channel" of content. Multiple channels mean it is a network (of channels). -- Netoholic @ 21:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
On 19 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Marvel Music (imprint), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Marvel Comics briefly operated an imprint dedicated to comics about musicians? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Marvel Music (imprint). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Marvel Music (imprint)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:32, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The Thomas-Spelling Productions page has just been created by an anoymous user that used visual edits to build the page. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A425:35B2:7345:5CD2 ( talk) 01:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
The origins of Spelling Television began in 1966 as Thomas-Spelling Productions got formed. In 1972, much of the staff held by Aaron Spelling Productions moved over to the newly-established Spelling-Goldberg Productions, and its first project was The Rookies. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A425:35B2:7345:5CD2 ( talk) 01:51, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
I need background help for Spelling-Goldberg Productions.
The origins traced to May 1, 1972, when Leonard Goldberg, Screen Gems' top TV executive left the studio to partner with Aaron Spelling, forming out Spelling-Goldberg Productions along with its staff from the Aaron Spelling Productions company. Not only producing The Rookies, he also produced made for TV movies. It was involved in a lawsuit with Worldvision Enterprises, the first distributor for The Rookies before Viacom took over in 1976. SGP signed a deal with Metromedia in 1973. In 1974, an attempt of a sitcom called The Fireman's Ball was made, but it was intially rejected when the FCC delayed the 22-hour program schedule to 1975, but the second pilot however aired in the May of 1975 as Where's the Fire? ABC however managed to dub it as "Aaron's Broadcasting Company", like with Aaron's other company Aaron Spelling Productions. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A425:35B2:7345:5CD2 ( talk) 02:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
I add others besides TV shows to the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page! -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:C8EE:3A36:CB9C:11C ( talk) 02:37, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
I hope the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page might redirect to Spelling Television or not redirected. The rights to their library produced by Aaron Spelling was split into two different companies:
The Spelling-Goldberg Productions page was edited by anoymous users to add Chopper One plus anything besides TV shows and a few modifications. If its not notable, then it might redirect to the Spelling Television page, due to amid controversy regarding anoymous users' modifications. The ownership to Spelling Television's library belongs to two different companies ( CBS Television Distribution for most of Spelling's production output, Sony Pictures Television for the whole entire catalog produced by Aaron Spelling and Leonard Goldberg through Spelling-Goldberg Productions). -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:6CB3:A284:F4A1:D3B3 ( talk) 21:10, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The Spelling-Goldberg Productions page was modified by an anoymous user to replace "defunct" with "out of business".
It makes even worse, make it not notable and forced to redirect to the Spelling Television page, and the ownership of its library was split into two different companies ( CBS Television Distribution for the Thomas-Spelling, and Spelling Television libraries, and Sony Pictures Television for the Spelling-Goldberg library) -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:31FC:8CE9:84D9:2121 ( talk) 23:38, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
I agree to redirect the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page into the Spelling Television page, because this is not notable. An anoymous user said Spelling's production company has its origins in 1965. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:8942:365C:6947:65D8 ( talk) 02:30, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The Spelling-Goldberg Productions page has been edited by anoymous users, starting at August 22, 2017 with the addition of Chopper One. An anoymous user says Spelling Television was formed in 1965, not 1969. Spshu agreed that they will redirect the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page, because this was not notable and modified the Spelling Television page. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:51CD:52DC:F6AC:D56D ( talk) 11:28, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Spshu, the original distributor of The Bill Dana Show that should've been corrected is Weiss Global Enterprises. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:C18B:8A8A:EBDC:8CB1 ( talk) 02:31, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
DID we not have this conversation last month in the United Artists talk page? Did we not?? Instead of you always starting edit wars with most users, read and understand these sources properly! Did you bother reading those sources I've put on that talk page and did you find anymore sources that I've put?? King Shadeed 15:18, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
No, King Shadeed. SGP was actually sold to Columbia in 1982, which means the page does not redirect to Spelling Television. Also, Spshu replace the simple Broadcasting Magazine magazines with a more visual one. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A004:2744:5EEB:9592 ( talk) 00:43, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
For a list of Sony Pictures Television shows, I Dream of Jeannie and Nancy were both co-produced by Sidney Sheldon Productions. And for The Monkees, it was co-produced by Raybert Productions. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:CCD6:DAB0:1BBC:4F4A ( talk) 03:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Talk:Marvel_Toys
We're currently having a discussion about Marvel Toys being renamed back to Toy Biz as Toy Biz was the common name for the dissolved business. Please leave your thoughts about this name change towards this discussion. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 09:54, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Spashu, You keep rolling back changes on me and I do not understand what you are referring to by "stop rearranging or rmv. fields in the ibox - it does not effect display, but". I have been editing with the visual editor. I would like to know what is being screwed up as to not continuously have changes rolled back and make sure I am not breaking things. Please be aware of your audience that we are not all experts on Wikipedia but know the subjects that we are updating. Dan roman ( talk) 18:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Spshu - thanks for the information you sent me regarding the updates I had made to the AerisWeather page. However, I do believe some updates will need to be made to accurately reflect the page. I went in and tried to update the company to Praedictix, but then I realized I am not able to update the title of the page. Are you able to do so as the description of the page is a better reflection of the company history for Praedictix. Here's a brief history for your sake:
MediaLogic sold all HamWeather assets including the AerisWeather brand over a year ago which those assets continue to operate under. All MediaLogic remaining assets were rebranded to Praedictix who continue to provide broadcast weather videos, consulting and forensic services.
In conclusion, AerisWeather is no longer in the Media business and is a global weather data and imagery provider only. I am an active AerisWeather employee and we are trying to ensure the information we have online regarding our company is accurate. If you need to confirm on your end, please feel free to hit us up via support: https://www.aerisweather.com/contact/
Bclark0622 ( talk) 17:42, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Hopefully you can assist in updating the AerisWeather page to Praedictix
MediaLogic sold all HamWeather assets including the AerisWeather brand over a year ago which those assets continue to operate under. All MediaLogic remaining assets were rebranded to Praedictix who continue to provide broadcast weather videos, consulting and forensic services. Two separate companies with distinctly different charters. We are not avid Wikipedia users so your assistance is appreciated. Both companies happen to be based in Eden Prairie, MN.
Rebrand to Praedictix https://mblsportal.sos.state.mn.us/Business/SearchDetails?filingGuid=e8eba010-18c2-e611-8167-00155d46d26e
Best 184.105.35.130 ( talk) 18:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello there,
Thank you for reaching out to me. I would like to resolve this as AerisWeather is a great tool that I'm using for a project and want to correct and update the article to share some of the features/applications powered by it as a long time lurker and now more active Wikipediaite - perhaps the solution is the rename the page to its current described company name - seems to be Praedictix. Is there a way to fork pages that you can recommend? More confusing than a blank page is one that is wholly inaccurate.
I would like that, Barnaby Jones was formerly distributed by Columbia Pictures Television, as evidenced by this source "Broadcasting, June 13, 1977, pg. 50". But King Shadeed agreed in the " List of CBS Television Studios programs#QM Productions" section. King Shadeed also agreed, as evidence by the same source that The San Pedro Beach Bums was originally distributed by Metromedia Producers Corporation. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:81E7:7D05:B95B:11D0 ( talk) 02:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Around the mid 1970s, Time-Life Television got the rights to the pre-1973 Spelling-Goldberg Productions library. [1] [2]
King Shadeed, what owns the rights to the TV movies (The Daughters of Joshua Cabe, No Place to Run, Say Goodbye, Maggie Cole, The Bounty Man, Home for the Holidays, The Great American Beauty Contest and The Bait) now? It is Sony Pictures Television (the owners of the Spelling-Goldberg library), HBO Enterprises (the owners of the Time-Life library), CBS Television Studios (the owners of the pre-1973 ABC catalog) or Disney-ABC Domestic Television (the owners of the ABC Circle Films catalog and the copyright to these TV movies)? -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:359B:FDC1:80C1:F23E ( talk) 02:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Dear Spshu I'm sorry for what I said about you because of edits for what I made because HIT Entertainment is a company which is 90% British 10% American and can you forgive me Wikipedia is legal to edit free for everyone to use and anyone can create their own articles. And one more question for you What does your name stand for?
Dear; Spshu what are reliable sources?
King Shadeed, add important notice to the Spelling Television page!
A company ran by Douglas S. Cramer (who partnered with Spelling as executive producer for shows and TV movie projects between 1977 and 1991, and also acts as executive vice president at the time), The Douglas S. Cramer Company co-existed at the same time, producing Wonder Woman, and TV movies like Dawn Potrait of a Teenage Runaway, but these series are not part of the modern day library now owned by CBS. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:9507:6743:3D0E:8B38 ( talk) 03:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
King Shadeed, I will going to edit the Spelling Television page to replace simple reference links with more advanced reference links derived from sources. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:2989:35B6:E3FC:ACBF ( talk) 02:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
"The Spelling logo continues to appear on the covers of DVD releases of the Spelling library except for those shows owned outright by Sony Pictures Television, the shows produced by Danny Thomas and Aaron Spelling, like The Mod Squad and The Guns of Will Sonnett and shows that were not originally produced by Spelling although eventually later acquired, such as Bonanza and the Quinn Martin shows." -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:1C82:E885:7ABE:1B18 ( talk) 04:05, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Disney International HD in India is being marketed as a general entertainment channel by Disney India. Even though it has Disney Channel original shows the strategy in India is different and is completely separate from Disney Channel India. So it should have its own page. User 261115 ( talk) 18:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Some of the cites were missing author names, pointing to the wrong urls and/or missing dates when articles were published. 86.152.12.237 ( talk) 16:55, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
This article was redirected after a lengthy effort at consensus at Talk:Marvel Music, as I mentioned in my edit summary. Is there some reason you ignored that and restored it again anyway? Argento Surfer ( talk) 16:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Dear; Spshu you thought I was going to send you a complaint alert to you but I'm not because another user edited HiT Entertainment and I didn't make bad edits and I edited that page but please don't think that I made bad edits and I saw you say that I'm not a good user but your wrong and I'm sorry for saying it over and over but I want you to know that I have a user who is a good user like everyone and myself and it is Trivialist and remember to know because that user sends me letters and send letters back and I hope and the user doesn't think that I'm a bad user but you do and say but won't you apologize and if you want to check out the user's page click the link in the description below. PLEASE SEND ME A THANK YOU LETTER AND THANK TRIVIALIST TOO AND FORGIVE ME AND REMEMBER WHAT I TYPED.
Trivialist TTTEFan2017 ( talk) 04:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
I have a quick favour to ask you, would you be able to fix the feature film table of New World Pictures? The formatting's all weird and inconsistent. Cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 21:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Happy Holidays Spshu, I just wanted to say would you like to send a message back to me and I'm going to edit HIT Entertainment so thank me because and don't think I made bad edits and think I'm a bad user send me a thank you letter and say I'm sorry I was wrong for saying don't add or change edits TTTEFan2017 can you forgive me say that on your message back to me please do not ignore my message. TTTEFan2017 ( talk) 23:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I saw your edit on HiT Entertainment and your right, I was wrong to say do not remove to you send me a message that says Happy Holidays. TTTEFan2017 ( talk) 23:03, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Marvel Entertainment. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. XXzoonamiXX ( talk) 20:33, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu.
You are invited to join
WikiProject Food and drink, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of
food,
drink and
cuisine topics. |
)
Please (a) stop edit warring at major film studio and (b) stop doing so in such a way that you are deleting good content. I have explained why A24 belongs; you have deleted it without explanation. As for Gaumont and Amblin, we can take that up on the article's Talk page. — DCGeist ( talk) 22:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, what's it going to be? Are you going to restore A24, or shall I? — DCGeist ( talk) 22:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Next time you try to proceed as you have here, I will most certainly report you. — DCGeist ( talk) 22:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Disney International HD. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You behave this way and force your edits upon others no matter what. Judging by your talk page it's a common thing you do. User 261115 ( talk) 02:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Disney International HD. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. User 261115 ( talk) 03:06, 12 January 2018 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:User 261115 (Result: ). Thank you. User 261115 ( talk) 03:22, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! User 261115 ( talk) 15:49, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I see you have a history of edit warring on this and other pages. Such behavior is unacceptable. In the present case, multiple editors have now explained to you that your preferred version is unsourced. If you proceed to edit war over this matter, you will be blocked. Time to move on. DocKino ( talk) 18:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Dear; Spshu more you may know me as TTTEFan2017. But I decided to change my name to TTTE&StarWarsFan2018. Remember when you said do not add remove or change content to me. Wikipedia is a place to read or to edit, but what you said to me was mean. I felt like you were trying to ban me from editing it was just an edit, DO NOT TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY LIKE YOU DID LAST YEAR I am trying to provide good faith and Trivialist realizes that I can be thanked for editing. WARNING! SO DO NOT TYPE ANYTHING BAD ABOUT ME OR TELL ME TO STOP EDITING. IF YOU DO I WILL BE DISAPPOINTED! APOLIGIZE TO ME ON MY TALK PAGE AND DO NOT SAY PLEASE DO NOT TAKE EDITS TO SERIOUSLY, AND I'M SORRY FOR MY TONE AND I HAD TO TYPE THIS. As for HiT Entertainment the article that you I and others edit will get semi-protected for whatever long. So I'm going to thank you on the last edit you made and the line you said was good faith and it said: that is so you don't have to manual change "years ago". and Trivialist would probably thank you too. That concludes was my backstory. Have any suggestions my talk page is always here you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TTTE&StarWarsFan2018 ( talk • contribs) 20:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted your redirect. Firstly the first incarnation the WWF owned 50% and NBC owned 50%. Neither the WWFE or NBC is associated with this so the owners are not the same. WWF went public in 1999, so Vince McMahon's indirect ownership in the league was drastically below 50%. Your comments on similar owners is just plain wrong. Second, if you watch the press conference Vince made it very clear that this is not the old XFL. He considered using a different name but just liked the name XFL which is why he used it, but made it very clear it is not the original league. - Galatz Talk 23:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Larry Levinson Productions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Murder 101 ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits to Super RTL.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. -- 2607:FCC8:6250:0:183C:6845:EAC5:2655 ( talk) 00:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Spshu_reported_by_User:2607:FCC8:6250:0:643B:F6DF:E239:88C2_(Result:_No_violation) -- NeilN talk to me 19:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for finding information on Fourth Class Cities. I didn't know they even existed. Criticalthinker ( talk) 02:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC) |
Excellent find! I had no idea about Fourth Class Cities, and I have a particular interest in local governments, especially here in Michigan where I live. What I would like to nail down is exactly how many cities still hold this status. The article you sourced seems to save four or five, but only gives an example of Yale and Sandusky. I'm also interested in some other information I think you've added. What is the difference between regular charter and special charter, and which predominate? The wiki article seems to say that most cities were transformed into special charters, so I assume that means that original charters are those very early cities (i.e. Detroit)? -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 03:02, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, would you be able to check the formatting and wording of UTV Software Communications article. They're the media conglomerate wholly owned by The Walt Disney Company India. The biggest issue with the article is the severe lack of citations and the weird wording that various editors have edited this article. This is a really interesting company and it's a shame that the poor article formatting is damaging this article's credibility. Would you be able to take the time to evaluate it and make the necessary edits please? cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 21:10, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
WLNS-TV. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Please follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle on United States Air Force. The information is well sourced, and I would strongly reccomend discussing it on the talk page rather than blanking. Garuda28 ( talk) 13:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Spshu? Read this: "Do not link to search pages for Wikipedia citations. These pages are not static and change often." All of that links to the search pages. They want us to use this: "On the list of search results the Issue Date "1951-01-17-BC-OCR-Page-0012" is the link to an issue containing your search terms ub YYYY-MM-DD and page order. Click on any link to view the actual page". I don't know how often David and his admin staff check how often we use their content, but they gave us that format for us users to use. That ends the confusion so that Wikipedia doesn't get into trouble. So why did you change that in the first place? King Shadeed March 26, 2018 11:40 EDT.
Quick favour, regarding the comments of the edits that you do, you're notes are excessively abbreviated. Said abbreviations can be difficult for some editors to understand. Is it okay if you use full names as opposed to condensed names (unless said article/entity is officially recognized under the condensed name)? not only will it make your edits more clearer, but there's a high enough word count for full sentences now. cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 15:22, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Why do you have to ruin a good article with your style of formatting. I know the DTV transition is in the past, so I left it were it was. I reverted your other edits though. It made the article hard to read. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:16, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney Direct-to-Consumer and International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rebecca Campbell ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:25, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Same goes for you. User 261115 ( talk) 20:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Bankster ( talk) 22:27, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Flint water crisis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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. TomCat4680 ( talk) 15:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
I noticed this at Pontiac, Michigan. The edit summary does not give an adequate reason why the content was removed. I'd like to restore this...
Thanks WhisperToMe ( talk) 13:05, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Disney International HD. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Plus you ignore what I say to you on the talk page. User 261115 ( talk) 19:18, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Disney International HD, you may be blocked from editing. User 261115 ( talk) 14:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andromeda (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mutant X ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Disney International HD shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. User 261115 ( talk) 16:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jim Ananich, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Cherry ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey there, you don't mind contributing to Talk:Disney–ABC Television Group regarding the merge of Capital Cities/ABC Inc.? It's an outdated discussion and it won't be closed unless there's more than one person who makes a joint decision. Thank you. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 15:30, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marvel Anime, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madhouse ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Thought you might find this link useful. - theWOLFchild 01:08, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marvel Entertainment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Etihad Stadium ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
@ Spshu: Do you know of the connections between Flint Automobile and Little Motor Car Company and Flint Wagon Works? I see Alexander Brownell Cullen Hardy and Durant were tied up with both of them. Is Flint Wagon Works and Flint Automobile one and the same? I thought I might try to harmonise the two articles. Regards, Eddaido ( talk) 23:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bleecker Street (company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Variety ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:12, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Listen Spshu, your edits are nonsense according to me. CLT-UFA merged with Pearson's television division to form the RTL Group, and Buena Vista International Television Investments doesn't exist. Please stop reverting the Super RTL article with lies, otherwise you'll be permabanned from this site.
Westj1211 ( talk) 01:07, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
←There you go, since you just want to try to rub it in my nose so bad. Just because you project your own faults on me. Instead it will remain as a monument of your poor boorish behavior. -- Westj1211 ( talk) 01:05, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
You have participated at List of breakfast drinks Therefore, you might be interested in the deletion nomination of the article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of breakfast drinks (2nd nomination) -- Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 16:07, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm archiving your talk page because it was getting too long. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 17:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adventure Island ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
I think the list should be limited to physical assets and businesses. So the Las Vegas Bowl event shouldn't be included, but if, say, there was a Las Vegas Bowl LLC subsidiary of ESPN Events, that could be listed. Trivialist ( talk) 21:17, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Spshu, once I become an administrator, I will see the IP address and ISP, then block you permanently from all Wikimedia sites, because you don't care about the Super RTL article, only the Broadband TV News article on Super RTL. I WILL ban you for your poor grammar, and irrelevant information from an irrelvant website. DO NOT REVERT THE SUPER RTL ARTICLE. IF YOU DO, I WILL BAN YOU. But in order to ban you, I have to achieve 10,000 edits for this. -- Westj1211 ( talk) 20:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello! I understand that you deleted the information about Luna Petunia (fifth season) and Treehouse Detectives as (future) Hasbro productions in the "Filmography" section of Hasbro Studios and I admit that I should not add that. I should investigate more and I'm sorry. After writing everything, I realized that the credits of both series did not include the Hasbro logo.
But I think it was unnecessary for you to eliminate everything added about what happened with those series at the time of the acquisition, in the "History" section. In that section it is mentioned that "at the time" of the acquisition, PRBM was in pre-production, but it is also worth noting what happened with the other series.
It would be nice if you could write about the PRSNS hiatus and the premieres of the fifth season of Luna Petunia and the new series Treehouse Detectives, with your own words in a more professional way, since they are Saban productions that were produced before the acquisition and that were released after it became official, those series are now owned by Hasbro and are part of the history of the acquisition as well.
Again, I am very sorry if it causes any discomfort.
I'll wait for an answer, bye!
-- Angel135 ( talk) 03:01, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney's Fairy Tale Weddings & Honeymoons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Father of the Bride ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:04, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Spshu, did you mean to undo your own edit at Disney streaming service? Your edit summary makes me think that this may have been a goof. Thanks, and have a good day, Gilded Snail ( talk) 14:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Tell me something. Is Amblin Partners listed here as a studio?
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WLNS-TV. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Global Road Entertainment. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's
talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an
appropriate noticeboard or seek
dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to
request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be
blocked from editing.
You've been reverting a lot of edits on the founding date
Beasting123 (
talk) 21:49, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Beasting123. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Beasting123 that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I gave you a warning, as you have reverted that page 3 times recently. You responded with this: "Do not aid disruptive IP editors nor falsely attack some for removing unexplained and distruptive edits". I do not believe it was disruptive at all. You have edited that article multiple times reverting the same information, and your talk page shows you have a history of it. Beasting123 ( talk) 21:56, 31 August 2018 (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. Beasting123 ( talk) 03:32, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm ever so sorry. You are indeed correct! Marvel did have involvement in the show. I was only remembering the end of the credits where the logos appear and only Sunbow's was shown and NOT Marvel's But regardless they were in the main set of credits and yes I should have looked at them prior, you made the right call to revert everything to normal. Once again, my bad. Blame failing memory of mine and the sheer incompetence of Sunbow for not including Marvel's logo at the end. D31 ( talk) 01:03, 6 September 2018 (UTC)David31584 D31 ( talk) 01:03, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not a new user. Hence, it is wrong for you to send me templates of vandalism edits where it is clearly not. Please argue the next time you revert me on Super RTL, which is barely understandable and seems to be raw-translated from German, thanks. -- Bankster ( talk) 23:22, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Spshu, might I kindly suggest that you look into setting up archiving on your Talk page? The size of this page (732 MB+ and 12+ years worth of messages) is really kind of ridiculous, and it makes it somewhat difficult for other editors to review and/or post new messages for you. (Perhaps even somewhat difficult for you.) Just a suggestion. General Ization Talk 00:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
I've started a discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard. Let's wait for some other editors to weigh in before we continue any further. -- 68.32.218.140 ( talk) 21:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited HBO Films, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Picturehouse ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Freaky Friday (2018 film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
And don't make WP:POINT-y edits with maintenance tags. Thank you. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 14:23, 25 October 2018 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Amaury (Result: ). Thank you. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 14:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 00:48, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Esuka323:, you are missing the point about the canvassing that was part of showing that Amaury was disruptive and spoiling for an edit war in canvassing thus reverting him was legitimate (and should not count towards 3rr). Since I did not agree with him Amaury thus ended discussion (so much for BRD being "policy" - it is not - "This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community." "The BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (BRD) is an optional method of reaching consensus. This process is not mandated by Wikipedia policy, but it can be useful for identifying objections, keeping discussion moving forward and helping to break deadlocks." I still started the discussion not Amuary) and ran off to 3RR because he did not "win", while I continued discussion with him. Amaury met 5 out of 6 signs of begin disruptive (the one sign not met conflicts with another - it is over use of requesting citation needed). Since, he was being disruptive my reverts of him should not be counted. He directly interprets PRIMARY to allow himself to violate WP:V. Therefor the canvassing argument was to undermine Amaury's status as disruptive in this matter and coloring my previous interactions with IJBall and Amaury which was benign as confrontational. So, to say that focusing on canvassing like that was the only issue and you acting like it is too may have under minded the whole disruptive nature of the two of them. I am not the one pretending I did not do anything wrong IJBall feels that he his above reproach loaded with a personal attack "(Undid revision 865550130 by Spshu (talk) - Remove nonsense from an editor with a serious problem...)" in reverting notification of edit warring and IJBall removing notices to Amuary (Remove nonsense - DTtR...)" in reverting a host of notification about his behavior and and yes why I did not follow DTtR. They don't seem to believe there are issue with themselves. And if I just throw myself on the mercy of the administrator that makes it easy for the administrator not to see the bigger view and just punish me, when it "takes two to tango" (edit war).
@ EdJohnston:, where are the blocks for Amuary and IJBall - fair is fair. I clearly show Amuary as disruptive and the records show that IJBall also exceeded the 3RR mark and should have been easy to pick up on with out me telling you as it "takes two to tango". Since you did not, here they are:
hi,
Both are separate companies, and not the same. Hayholt ( talk) 17:28, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Howard T. Owens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Meredith Corporation, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages ABC and A&E ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:20, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey there Spshu. Would you be able to clarify whether Marvel Games was previously known as Marvel Interactive? Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 00:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I have reverted an edit of yours on this article, and would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
~ ToBeFree ( talk) 20:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC) |
Spshu, I was very close to blocking you after reviewing your recent edit history. You have gone well beyond WP:3RR on multiple pages: the only reason I'm not doing so is because it's been over 8 hours since your last revert. If you continue to approach a content dispute in this manner, you are looking at an extended block, possibly without any warning. Your block log is long, and it won't be long before someone blocks you indefinitely: I don't think you want that. Just please stop after being reverted, and try to reach a consensus on the relevant talk page. Vanamonde ( talk) 03:57, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited NBCUniversal Cable Entertainment Group, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Buzz and Snap ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:40, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WKRC-TV; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:24, 17 January 2019 (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. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:45, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Please do not edit page Marvel HQ or strict action would be taken against you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Social XD ( talk • contribs) 16:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Alpha Flight Special vol2 No1.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) 18:25, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
The file File:Stirr logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Willy1018 (
talk) 06:26, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Can you please get your facts right about United Artists Releasing and United Artists Digital Studios? UA Releasing IS UA Corporation, it's a resurrection of UA as its original self, a film distribution company, and UA Digital Studios is just a SEPARATE company that only uses the name. So UA Releasing is the PERMANENT successor, not UA Digital Studios, which is only a quiet revival of the name. If I'm trying to show you proof here, you need to look at this page. 88.84.156.101 ( talk) 19:16, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
FYI, nothing ever said that Fox Entertainment Group ceased to exist. Therefore, we are listing it as a Disney subsidiary. Good day. HurricaneGeek2002 ( talk) 20:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Now that you’ve listed a source that states that FOX EG is dead, this no longer applies. HurricaneGeek2002 ( talk) 20:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on A Cinderella Story (film series); that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 19:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
You have over 300 discussions on your talk page. Would you consider archiving your talk page and just limiting it to the last 12 months' worth of discussions? It's hard and unwieldy to navigate such a large talk page. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, To prevent an edit war, Please take to AfD or the article talk page if contest it's notability.
Thanks, RhinosF1 (chat) (status) (contribs) 19:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
jump off😡 Esaïe Prickett ( talk) 03:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:King Crimson the Third (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. EdJohnston ( talk) 21:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox 2000 Pictures, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Division and Brad Simpson ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
You didn't have to revert the whole thing, just put that section back. You're just like BlueboyLI. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:45, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Where are your claims that Blue and Dolphin Reef are different movies? You're just making the page more confusing that it already was. Luigitehplumber ( talk) 12:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
So I left a message in regards to my edits via Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Edit-warring at Template:Film Studio.-- King Crimson the Third ( talk) 19:32, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Okay, this is getting out of hand here. We asked you time and time via Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film again to stop reverting my edits via the Major film studio article. What you may be doing considering your childish behavior may be considered editing and/or reverting war and you will be blocked just for that.-- King Crimson the Third ( talk) 23:56, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Preach. Nice to see I’m not the only one who’s called him out on this behavior. You constantly think you’re always right in a “never my fault” kinda way. HurricaneGeek2002 ( talk) 02:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Prospect Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Captain Blood ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
In regards to your recent revert on the 20th Century Fox Animation page, was it necessary? Because when I edit that page; as well as major film studio; you just revert my edits and allegedly used them as unsourced. This confuses me. I used all my sources and wording, and at the same time fixed the errors; but yet you revert my edits. I'm curious, have you tried looking at the original edits before reverting?-- King Crimson the Third ( talk) 22:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Evidence for this statement
TCFHE page states “a wholly-owned subsidiary of Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment.”
It is listed on the table on the DTCI page as a transfer from 21CF
It is also listed on
List of assets owned by The Walt Disney Company and
template:Disney
Think about these things before changing it back. And also admit your wrongdoing while you comment on this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.54.163.113 ( talk) 17:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Davison, Michigan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tim Thomas ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox Networks Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Setanta ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox Networks Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Meo ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 14:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox Networks Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RCN ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 17:10, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Are there any sources that Turner Program Services renaming it into Telepictures Distribution in 1996 when the Turner-Time Warner merger completed. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:1827:DE69:13D1:2B4 ( talk) 05:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Look at the source: "telepictures%20distribution" here. But looks like it was actually formed in 1995, not 1996 when Turner Program Services merged with Telepictures to create Telepictures Distribution. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:6CF9:18A4:6D33:A6F0 ( talk) 14:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited HBO Max, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mystery ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Why'd you have to revert the whole thing? Just correct the items in question. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 13:37, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney Theatrical Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Devil Wears Prada ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
You've reverted an editor ( CCVolk23zx ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) on some media articles. Please invite them to a discussion on any article talk page which you have taken issue with them previously. Also, if you have info that demonstrates trolling or vandalism on their part, please let me know. Thanks
Should we separate the films into theatrical, TV and direct ot video? A lot of templates seem to do that. ★Trekker ( talk) 02:05, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Edit history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Disney_Parks,_Experiences_and_Products
Someone decided to add in promotion for themselves or their favorite vlogger(s) in the attractions section and has caused a back and forth contest between other vloggers and/or their fans.
The unrelated/unsourced section has been removed for now but will likely be back. Throwawaybutnotrlly ( talk) 12:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Stop reverting MY edits on WLAJ. It is actually really irrevelant. REALLY. REALLY. IRREVELANT. STOP. REVERTING.THIS.
OR ELSE MVCG66B3R WILL REVERT YOUR EDITS AND BLOCK U. CentralTime301 ( talk) 22:47, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney Music Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page D23 ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:54, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WLAJ; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:33, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
"removed information not directly related to WYTU from info box, removed unsourced §" Then there should be separate articles on the Rockford and South Bend stations. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mvcg66b3r. I noticed that you recently removed content from WISN-TV without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 23:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at WISN-TV. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CentralTime301 ( talk) 17:54, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
What "facts" are you talking about? I'm just following the MOS and Mrschimpf's suggestions. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:08, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
The file File:PacProFootball Logo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Superseded by vector version
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Masum Reza
📞 09:16, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, regarding this edit, how exactly is the image «full of errors»? The French channel's coverage depicted on the map was extracted from satellite provider Canal+ Horizons, a Francophone TV operator in Africa that carries French-language TV networks in its offering; that includes children channels like Disney Channel France. You can even check by yourself using the programming guide from the TV provider and compare it with the Metropolitan French counterpart operator also broadcasting the same channel. This is also true for coverage in French territories outside of Europe (New Caledonia, French Guyana, Martinique); as those territories are French, they receive French channels, including this one in French TV providers such as Canal+ Caraïbes for the French Caribbean that also operates in Haiti since 2015 (thus also receiving Disney Channel France along with French kids channels such as Gulli) or Vini in French Polynesia, which also carries the same Francophone networks.
If you have any questions about the map, ask me -- Bankster ( talk) 00:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Please go to talk page of the entry in re the reference to Hercules and Xena. I decided to initiate a dialogue. Dgabbard ( talk) 17:46, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Why did you have to reverts edits made by some users on WLAJ a few months ago? Is it because of WP:MOS? Or is it because you want to edit it your way? Main CentralTime301 page and talk 19:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 835.9 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you.-- IanDBeacon ( talk) 23:26, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Just to let you know, Spshu, Viacom is now a disambiguation page. So when you link to the company, the way you did at A&E Networks, please use:
[[Viacom (2005–present)|Viacom]]
Thank you for your edits and for your support in this! P. I. Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 22:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I placed an archive bot on top of your talk page, because it was getting long and needed archiving (see here). Take their advice and please don't take it off. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Mvcg66b3r, place an archive bot on your talk page because it is long and needs archiving. Cheers! Central Time 301 19:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at WLNS-TV 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Cheers! Central Time 301 19:49, 19 November 2019 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:CentralTime301 (Result: ). Thank you. Cheers! Central Time 301 19:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for: making serious mistakes on WLNS-TV. Cheers! Central Time 301 20:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User talk:CentralTime301. Cheers! Central Time 301 20:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Look, I agree there's at least a discussion to be had about whether it needs at article, but can you at least stop reverting to the old version on Marvel Anime? It looks like it was written by a five year old and doesn't have any English sources, whereas I at least pulled from pages WP considers reliable like ANN and Crunchyroll. If you HAVE to do it, at least merge the new version in instead of leaving it a broken mess. -- Cyberlink420 ( talk) 18:25, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Verve Records, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Decca ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:34, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Title-- Esaïe Prickett ( talk) 00:11, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 02:21, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! | |
Hello Spshu, 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 2020. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
You currently appear to be 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. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Deep fried okra 18:10, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Based on your interest in this issue, you are invited to comment at Talk:WNGH-TV#RfC about TV and radio station style variances. Thanks. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:15, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
On 28 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Crossroads Village (Michigan), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Crossroads Village in Genesee County, Michigan, has a narrow huckleberry? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Crossroads Village (Michigan). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Crossroads Village (Michigan)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WJLA-TV; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 13:45, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for [37]! 192.101.255.184 ( talk) 19:46, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Biography (TV program) into
A&E Networks. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. —
Diannaa (
talk) 00:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 854.4 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you.— Diannaa ( talk) 00:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you changed the (home to right) standard in the xfl 2020 season and the website you used as a reference did not do that but did a winner to the left and loser to the right, example: BATTLEHAWKS 15, RENEGADES 9. Here the home is on the right. That is why I unfortunately had to revert your edit and keep the american standard of away to the left and home to the right. Sorry for the inconvenience. Mifoi123 ( talk) 23:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Disneynature 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please stop editing the Dolphin Reef information against its article's information. --
JN95 (
talk) 21:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
The discussion continues on the specific Talk page of the entry. Regards -- JN95 ( talk) 21:19, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney–ABC Domestic Television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lost ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 14:57, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
You reverted the whole thing, thus reverting my corrections. Just fix the stuff you think needs fixing. Also, please archive your talk page. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bob Chapek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Walt Disney Studios ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:37, 29 February 2020 (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. Cyberlink420 ( talk) 13:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mvcg66b3r. I noticed that you recently removed content from KSHV-TV without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 16:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you want to change up the format. That's fine as long as you keep EVERYONE that is on the list. If you don't, I will remove you from editing this page. Cytkory
Your recent editing history at List of management of The Walt Disney Company 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please stop editing the List of management of The Walt Disney Company information against its article's information.
Cytkory (
talk) 02:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
FUCK YOU! Cytkory ( talk) 01:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm back and I have calmed down, but please explain to me how an official press release from Disney is not a good source. Also, you don't have to undo everything to make it better in YOUR eyes. I appreciate where your coming from, but I don't want to restart this argument again. Cytkory ( talk) 01:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed you've undone my edit to Sky Documentaries and reverted back to the redirect? I'm just wondering why that's been done - and by the way, the redirect was broken as it is to a section which isn't on that page. I've fixed the redirect. -- Tvcameraop ( talk) 18:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
What Do You Mean By "Unexplained"?
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A&E Networks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Orchard ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey, I really need you to be on your best behaviour with the List of management of The Walt Disney Company issue, leading by example rather than being revert-heavy. Please use the talk page. If the other editor doesn't participate in discussions in say, a week, make your move, and if they revert without discussion, leave the article the way it is, and then come see me or another admin. You don't want to get caught up in sanctions. You might also look for ways to make smaller changes that might not be as controversial, so that any specific changes the other editor disputes can be identified, unless they're just blanket-reverting all of your edits. Obviously it's not cool for someone to stonewall changes to articles while refusing to discuss. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 01:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Just because PlayStation Productions will release films and is part of the Sony family doesn't mean it's part of the SPMPG. The founders of PlayStation Productions will report to the heads of SIE. It's not acceptable because it's not part of SPE. Show a proper reference for it and stop vandalizing Wikipedia.
173.93.207.154 ( talk) 07:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Please stop putting unimportant information about producing partners into the article. You can place a source next to the production companies in the infobox but it's not vital to know who's shopping the film. Rusted AutoParts 19:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
According to Template:Film studios, there seems to be some questionable edits, such as two studios owned by the same company in the same template. Example would be that Warner Bros. also owns Bad Robot Productions and Spyglass Media Group and yet they are in the same template as with Warner Bros. Also IMAX Filmed Entertainment redirects to the IMAX article. I recommend you read [[Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates# Wikipedia:Reliable sources or Wikipedia:Navigation template.-- 98.182.134.231 ( talk) 00:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
When using an archived material of The Hollywood Reporter (since 2006), Variety (since 1991) or The LA Times or The NY Times, we need to check your citations. Should I use VarietyUltimate, then check to see the text. -- 172.127.114.25 ( talk) 12:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Can you please stop reverting my edit on WLAJ? It is considered disruptive and if you try to keep reverting these edits, I will have to file a report on WP:AN/3 about you. 107.242.113.16 ( talk) 18:32, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
I was telling the truth on the logo for 20th Century Studios. Picturemill animated it and it was on the picturemill's website reel. -- Rod14 ( talk) 13:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to discuss the distributor for Hulk: Where Monsters Dwell. I am aware that it did not receive a theatrical release, but at the same time, it still appears to have been distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures and not by Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment. On the Company Credits section on the film's IMDb page, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures is listed as the distributor. And keep in mind that Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment is the name of a specific label used to release films associated with the Disney brand rather than being the division responsible for all direct to video films released by the company. Thanks. The Editor 155 ( talk) 14:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Okay thanks for the info. The Editor 155 ( talk) 16:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Can I and Katlenmeyer collaborate on the Scott Free Productions#History page, by making various sources more realistic? -- 172.127.114.25 ( talk) 06:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I think one citation on the Scott Free Productions#History article that the source appears to be invalid, by using a more realistic Variety source. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:60D5:E003:3DA2:3327 ( talk) 06:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
We have to analyze Percy Main's deal with Paramount, using Variety and Hollywood Reporter sources on Scott Free Productions#History page! -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:60D5:E003:3DA2:3327 ( talk) 18:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to WLNS-TV, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 107.77.189.39 ( talk) 16:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
I forgot Roger Birnbaum had an experience working at Henry Winkler's Company (by the time it had non-exclusive deals with Paramount and ABC) prior to 1985. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:CCD9:DD1D:9558:5914 ( talk) 20:23, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George R. Poulos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George R. Poulos until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn ( talk) 20:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ABC Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harm's Way ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Just letting you know that someone put back the Marvel Animated Universe article page, I know you deleted it so I just wanted to let you know, also do you know where that name came from? as far as I know it was never officially referred to as such. Aaa11769 ( talk) 08:24, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited RFD-TV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Branson.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
The 1981 founding date for Amblin Entertainment should not be correct. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:308D:1E37:8815:3F7C ( talk) 02:48, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages are difficult to read and load slowly over slow connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 887.1 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you. 67.85.37.186 ( talk) 19:46, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. I suggest you come to the ANI discussion at [39] and contribute your own viewpoint on the issues being discussed there. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 16:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Spshu, your talk page is on my watchlist (probably from reverting Nate Speed abuse via Twinkle) and when the ANI notice showed up in my watchlist, I realized that I haven't seen your name in a long while. I hope you are doing well and please take care. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 19:50, 15 January 2021 (UTC) |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeff Wright (politician), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Wright (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry Bankert until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Bearcat ( talk) 19:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Darryl Buchanan, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darryl Buchanan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Woredas of Ethiopia. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 6#Template:Woredas of Ethiopia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Platonk ( talk) 04:33, 6 December 2021 (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 |
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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:107.242.125.34. Thank you. 107.242.125.34 ( talk) 23:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
The Prime Time Entertainment Network was just a blanket title for syndicated programming used by Warner Brothers. It was NOT a full-fledged network, even though several stations who carried PTEN-branded programming (like WWOR) eventually joined UPN in 1995. I have corrected this fact.
Rollosmokes 17:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
It was not a "blanket title for sydnicated programming" until CC/United Television pull out. The Federal Trade Commission & Federal Communication Commission does not consider a "TV Network" a TV Network untill it offers
15 hours of prime time(note 14) (7 PM to 11 PM) programming. I remember when the WB and UPN where starting up and that the were not offically considered networks. PTEN was structured the same way MyNetworkTV (MNTV) is now, sydnicated arm (20th Television) together with TV Station company consoritium (Fox Station Group). The Neworks prime time hourly offerings: MNTV 12, the
CW 13,
Fox 15,
ABC 22,
CBS 22,
NBC 22. I remember reference when UPN and the WB were starting up that they were not offical networks as they were below the specified hours but people considered them networks and as far as I know they never exceed 15 hours of programming. So as it stands you would have to remove MNTV, UPN, WB and CW as networks. But I think that most people would consider them as networks, since that was the intent when they were started as the affiliates got the whole programming.
Spshu 19:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to WWOR-TV, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. NeutralHomer T: C 14:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, as an administrator and someone who contributed to the PTEN discussion that PTEN is a network. Rollosmokes reverted my restoration of WWOR-TV PTEN affiliation. Then Neutralhomer attacks me as a vandal and refuses to look at the previous discussion that was archived. Now Neturalhomer is making threats to have me banned for his failure to follow the discussion and proof of PTEN's network status. Spshu 15:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Are you sure that Woolworth at Genesee Valley Center was replaced with KB Toys and other stores? Everyone I know says it was cut into smaller stores (possibly the Waldenbooks that you mentioned), and that after those smaller stores left, the former Woolworth was turned into Steve & Barry's. 68.188.191.9 12:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
You changed the owner of KFTY from Clear Channel to Newport; however, that information is not correct. The sale of the station (and others) from Clear Channel to Newport has not been approved by the FCC, even though Newport has already applied to sell KFTY to LK. The station should still list Clear Channel as its owner, not Newport. Please be more careful and verify your information before adding it to articles. Thanks. dhett ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
You recently reverted my edit that disambiguated Avengers on Demolition Man (comics). I disambiguated the wikilink again to direct it to the Avengers (comics) page instead of the Avengers disambiguation page. It is far better to be directed to the actual page mentioned than to have to go through a disambiguation page to find the page you are looking for. Aspects ( talk) 19:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Good work on the content regarding the Avengers. Sorry we've gotten off on the wrong foot as it were, but your work regarding much of that content has been quite good and useful. I wish controversial subjects like certain possible members didn't exist, but it seems that sort of thing is, at least now, unavoidable, given the apparent contradictions to date. If and when the Sourcebook is gotten and it is found to verify or not verify a certain party's membership, I do think that some sort of accomodation of it would be required, maybe using a formula like that I proposed on the talk page in question. That sort of statement, indicating that the official view of given storylines may have been changed since the text was first written, would probably be the clearest way out. I do hope you can understand though that as Hiding has said it isn't really that anyone wants to disagree with you or anyone else, it's just that we think we are bound by honor and the policies of wikipedia to acknowledge what the experts say, in this case a recent editor and writer, whether they agree with what was said earlier or not. John Carter ( talk) 15:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I dropped a note in at WT:CMC. ( Emperor ( talk) 05:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC))
TomCat4680 (
talk) has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
TomCat4680 ( talk) 14:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I have accepted this case on behalf of the Mediation Cabal. I have left comments here. Please try and remain civil throughout the discussion. ErikTheBikeMan ( talk) 19:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I know that you have had some issues, with edits made to the List of Avengers members article in the past. I am writing to remind you, that when there is a dispute, proper etiquette is to discuss it on the talk page, before entering into an edit war. Please refer to the talk page, for the consensus that was made, on the reversion of your edits to this article. Fortdj33 ( talk) 13:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey I fixed it for you... there was just no metadata template for the Know Nothing party yet (look at its talk page and you'll see what I'm talking about)... that was the problem.
So if you go look at it now it should be fine.
Thanks for letting me know.
- Prezboy1 talk 21:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, great new template -- an informative idea. It needs some tweaking (image to be centered, non-used lines to disappear until they're filled). Do you know how to do this, or can you point me to template code? Thanks! -- Tenebrae ( talk) 13:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for update and clean up on Halo Burger CFBancroft ( talk) 05:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The founding year for Halo Burger, which they clearly indicate on their logo, is 1923. Period. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 18:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
But Thomas did not own Kewpees at all. He just had the rights to use the name; he was a licensee. Just as you would not consider a local franchisee of McDonald's as actually being McDonalds. Ed Adams of Toledo, Ohio owned Kewpee in 1945, not Thomas. Reporting the edit war on Halo Burger's Facebook page is meaningless and anti-wikipedian. Spshu ( talk) 21:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
First you state it is about the "original Harrison Street restaurant" then its is about "But the business still does." That is what I am pointing out. You have no clue. Spshu ( talk) 13:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Right then the restaurant started in 1923, Thomas' business that became Haloburger started in 1944 thus the multiple years in the foundation. But, you come out against the business notion then you switch positions back and forth. Spshu ( talk) 13:40, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Please do not remove valid references from an article. I don't see any reason why you should have to do so. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
No other article has a timeline. The one that's there is 100% redundant to the rest of the article. Why should it exist? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 00:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Logos do not lie. Read it. It says "Since 1923." Can that be any more plain? Steelbeard1 ( talk) 19:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:BTHaloburger.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 16:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their
user talk page. |
I have this other, editor Steelbeard1, has argued over fact of Halo Burger's founding but fails to comprend what any one is saying. The 3RR page always says if it content then go to mediation. He was also aware of his edit warring as going as far as to attempt to enlist others in his edit warring: TenPoundHammer, Rich Farmbrough, GrahamHardy, Denisarona. And reports me to HB's Facebook page.
Because there was content, I posted notices on the various projects/taskforces listed on the talk page. While the newcommers indicated that I was right, they indicted that one only year should be in the infobox as the rest would be in the article. So I devised a compromise to end the repetitive and debunked arguments.
He is now edit warring over the article being move to the Economy of Flint, Michigan instead of the Flint, Michigan Catagory which is basically in as it is a subcat. of Flint, Michigan.
I guess I am at complete loss on how to deal with him. Spshu ( talk) 22:09, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm familiar with Grand Blanc back then and Genesee County NEVER had an IHOP until this year. The Halo Burger which was in downtown Grand Blanc was a Perkins Pancake House. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 03:10, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
This citation at "11351"+%2B+"old+bridge"&dq="11351"+%2B+"old+bridge"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiWtZWa3t7QAhVPwWMKHRy-D1AQ6AEIGjAA proves that 11351 S. Saginaw in Grand Blanc which was Perkins Pancake House became a Halo Burger. So there. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 04:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
I'll note it there, but really, as long as he's not requesting unblock again it's not relevant. Daniel Case ( talk) 16:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I undid all of your moves. The naming has been discussed within the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting several times; since there a very little sources for English translations of associations' names, the project decided to keep article titles in the original language until there is real use of the English translation. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Article names#Main Points. All German associations use multiple translations in their official documents depending on the translator. -- jergen ( talk) 16:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
So, I guess you either use WOSM's naming convention or word for word order might make sense too. Spshu ( talk) 17:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.
In the Germany Language sentence order of the words are not as important as it is in the English language. Secondly for additional translation can be set up as redirects and indicated in the article. I just saying that using WOSM's translation, as most people might find these to be the most easily recognizable translation for the organizations' name as WOSM is a recognized international organization for WOSM's members. None of the other translations would be discounted they would just be used as redirects and indicated in the article. Spshu ( talk) 18:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Using a non-free image in the infobox is a clear policy violation. As to whether a free image is possible, Getty images manages to have taken 16 photos of her at public events without stalking her. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 19:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this edit. Is there some evidence for this? The township doesn't appear to use that form. While I have not seen the township charter for Vienna Township, I have looked at others that were available online, and there are some which do not use that form. That is, there are cases where the official charter creating the charter township does not use that form. So unless there is evidence that that is the official name, I don't think it is safe to assume that there is a "standard" official name. older ≠ wiser 21:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Steve Crossin The clock is ticking.... 09:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Move to Deford, Michigan talk page.
I see that you've restarted the Dayne Walling article, now that he has a stronger claim to notability. If you would like any of the information from the previously deleted version, drop a note on my page and I'll get it for you. -- Philosopher Let us reason together. 05:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I see you deleted anything negative about Dayne Walling. His documented failures as the mayor of Flint should be placed in his record. Under his leadership crime has past record's in the history of the city. Homicide alone doubled under his failed leadership. I am not sure who you are but documented information should be allowed in this profile.
Two editors have removed one infobox from the article Lotharingia, and you have the nerve to add two? Both of which do nothing to clarify a complex subject. You are not helping the encyclopedia. Srnec ( talk) 20:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Just wanted to let you know that your edits to President pro tempore of the United States Senate seem to be causing some error messages with the reference section. I can't figure out what exactly you were trying to do. Cheers! meamemg ( talk) 21:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:United States federal executive departments#"Federal" or "National"?. — Markles 17:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC) (Using {{ Please see}})
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is New United States Football League. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New United States Football League. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
A discussion has begun about whether the article New United States Football League, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New United States Football League until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — UncleDouggie ( talk) 03:56, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I can see why you might think that this is not the most appropriate name for the article, but in my experience it is far more commonly used in English language sources on this topic than the English translation. A Google search (restricted to English language pages) shows a 6 to 1 ratio in favour of "Federation Internationale de l'Automobile" over "International Automobile Federation" (See this vs this). It rises to 10 to 1 if not restricted to English language.
WP:EN does not, as far as I can see, say that articles must be named in the English language. It does say "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources". There must be some, but I can't think of any reliable sources on motorsport that use the English language version.
Cheers 4u1e ( talk) 16:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
P.S. There are several active wikiprojects covering this topic - if you're not convinced by my arguments, the most appropriate one to discuss it at is probably WP:MOTOR. Cheers. 4u1e ( talk) 16:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
Hey there Spshu, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Spshu/Sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
Thank you, -- DASHBot ( talk) 05:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
What you talking bout? Brian Boru is awesome ( talk) 22:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Spshu. I'd like to ask about this move to Seaboard Periodicals, which, as you note, is the formal name of the company. However, under Wikipedia naming conventions, we're supposed to use the subject's common name, and this company is routinely referred to as Atlas/Seaboard. Certainly, a change of this magnitude probably shouldn't have been undertaken without discussion on the talk page, for this very reason. Let's please discuss. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
An Unofficial Atlas/Seaboard Checklist
"Rise & Fall of Rovin's Empire" A candid conversation with Atlas/Seaboard editor Jeff Rovin Conducted by Jon B. Cooke Transcribed by Jon B. Knutson
by Jon B. Cooke Comic Book Artist #16
See [2]. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 23:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Nice add with that subhead — "Culture" is indeed distinct from "History." My compliments. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 15:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
DreamWorks. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. MikeWazowski ( talk) 23:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I was being very polite and you jumped down my throat. You are a mean person and you do article owning. You do it to other people and you are doing it here. You never want anyone to edit your work. And may I say that you are not a good writer because you writing is convoluted, it doesn't follow a straight line, it leaves things out and you misuse words. Other editors have trouble with you, too, I can see. -- Farpointer ( talk) 19:41, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the three reverts you have made at
Cadence Industries. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 00:56, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Except for the fact that the Cadence logo is for the current company with that name in the distribution and assembly of telecom equipment founded in 2007. Not sure how we hand that when the current company's only claim to fame is having the same name as a previously existing company. Spshu ( talk) 13:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not sure this is precisely correct. International Catalogue, which makes that statement, says its taking its information from Nevins. But Nevins is referring to Timely Publications, the overall pulp and comics publisher, and not the Timely Comics imprint: "Timely Publications (as Goodman's group had become known; before this it was known as "Red Circle" because of the logo that Goodman had put on his pulp magazines)." And Bellman refers to "a multitude of corporate entities (including Red Circle Comics) all producing the same product," just as Goodman had done with Azimuth, Zenith, etc. under the Atlas Comics imprint.
If you go to the Grand Comics Database, there's no listing for Red Circle as a publisher (except related to Archie Comics decades later) and the only "indicia publisher" paper corp. related to Goodman is a handful of 1950s Atlas comics. And Marvel Comics #1 was published by Timely Publications. (See GCD here), and there was no red circle on any subsequent issues. (See GCD here.) Goodman's pulps have a red circle on their covers, and that's what Nevins is referring to. As for Bellman, as I said, the only Red Circle Comics that Goodman published were a handful of Atlas titles in the 1950s.
I'd like to discuss this with you first before I edit that line. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 15:15, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
I didn't disagree with the Marvel Comics #1, I in fact pointed out that is why the comic book historian latched onto the name "Timely". ("Timely only selected as the representative name for Goodman's publishing group as a historian that began to research Marvel's history latched onto it given it being the publisher of Marvel Comics #1 not knowing that Goodman published under a number of corporations.") Look at some covers found on some of the Timely sites, Goodman didn't put any imprint/brand on some of the covers at all. Calling "Red Circle Comics" would seem logical with the common name for Goodman's pulp and other publishing ventures (Red Circle Books/Lion Books) being called Red Circle by historian in a similar situation to selecting Timely as neither were used consistantly by Goodman. I did remove the Marvel section from the Red Circle Comics article do to it being a nonindependent source referenced and the creation of the Red Circle (publishing) article and insertion of "Red Circle Comics" as a alternative name in the Timely Comics article. But back to your suggestion to place it in a foot note go ahead. Spshu ( talk) 13:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
In sincere appreciation of all your hard work editing and your detailed knowledge of corporate structure, both helping to make WikiProject Comics even better -- Tenebrae ( talk) 17:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC) |
You might want to take a look at another editor's change to the Marvel Comic infobox. I think you'd know the infobox protocol of "Owner" vs. "Parent" better than I. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 00:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Spshu! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click
HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:23, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hello. I was just wondering if you explain your reasoning for converting Harry Flynn into a disambiguation page? It seems to have resulted in the creation of a large number of disambiguation links most of which are intended to point to the Bishop. In my mind he appears to be the primary topic. As far as I can see "Harry Flynn" the publisher does not appear to be linked to any other articles. Perhaps you could point out that articles in which this subject is mentioned? Thanks, France3470 (talk) 18:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
A page you created, 'Green Oak, Michigan, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it redirects from an implausible misspelling.
You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.
Thank you. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 15:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I see you tried to trim this {navbox}. It didn't stick, as some want several thousand links in there. Perhaps you'd care to comment at Template talk:Disney#Purpose of a navbox. And see WP:HLIST and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-11-21/Technology report for info on current methods of implementing navboxes. Alarbus ( talk) 09:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
On 14 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jeff Wright (politician), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Jeff Wright, a county drain commissioner in Michigan, has also served as an FBI informant? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jeff Wright (politician).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
At this point you are being disruptive. You can take it to the talk page or to WP:FILMS if you like, but stop trying to edit war to get your way.
- J Greb ( talk) 00:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I realize I was wrong on reverting you first before discussing. Will you please accept my humble apology by having a cookie. BTW I hope you at least see some of my point on what I was concerned about and didn't take it the wrong way like J Greb did.
Cookies! | ||
Jhenderson777 has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
Spshu, over at Talk:Anglican Use there is a proposal to revert the redirect to Anglican Use of the Pastoral Provision article. -- Bruce Hall ( talk) 05:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
I think you should understand more about how the studios work and ownership by conglomerates.
Look at this old link I found before CBS Films was re-established:
And second, look at the article Major film studio because CBS Films is indeed a mini-major studio among other mini-majors that are listed. Plus, RKO Pictures is still alive and making films. http://www.rko.com
Let me know if you have anymore questions King Shadeed 13:17, July 9, 2012 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to WVIR-DT3, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC) 21:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Regarding your decision to label digital subchannels (many of which I created out of recognition of their increasing occurrence) as not meeting Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, I assure you that they do. Obviously, there may be a digital subchannel that is associated with a specialty "diginet" such as This TV and Me-TV that does not originate any local programming. However, I assume those added with new affiliation agreements with a big four television network (in markets lacking a major network affiliate) should be considered as important as a primary digital network station. While I will not resort to edit warring with the physical removal of the labels, I nicely urge you to consult an article's talk page first (or feel free to start one) on those pages that you would like to consider making changes (i.e. fundamental reasons why a page should or should not be created and basic article formatting). Personally, I think article talk pages are underutilized and editors simply choose to "revert now and ask questions later". I, for one, would gladly begin to practice what I preach here. Strafidlo ( talk) 02:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I have went through and rollbacked all of the blanketing of articles with GNG templates, near-vandalism deletion of information on pages and merging, all without consensus. I am tired of your running roughshod around the rules, so if you retemplate any of the subchannel pages, you will be blocked. If you mass delete tons of information from an article, you will be blocked. If you merge articles without discussion, you will be blocked. If you do anything without reading the rules first and getting consensus, you will be blocked. If you can do any of those things, then...you guessed it...you will be blocked. Between you and DreamMcQueen, your going around the rules to serve your own agendas is going to stop.
Straighten up, fly right, or...well, be blocked. Consider this your only warning. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at NBC California Nonstop shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You are also near 3RR on numerous other articles. Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC) 00:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
We are not doing this again, you didn't get consensus on three seperate talk pages now, you don't have consensus, you have moved into disruptive editing and a slow-moving content dispute where only you are disputing the content. Stop now. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
←There you go, since you just want to try to rub it in my nose so bad. Just because you project your own faults on me. Instead it will remain as a monument of you poor boorish behavior. Spshu ( talk) 22:04, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Why did you change Marvel Universe back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milomilk ( talk • contribs) 00:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Why do you have deleted my message in your talk page? I saw the discussion. Even there is consensus, the name Italo-Albanian still remains incorrect. -- Prodebugger ( talk) 23:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Do not, for ANY circumstances, remove any post that was not by you as you have done
here. -
Neutralhomer •
Talk • 22:58, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I noticed the NBC Owned Television Stations article you been working on at User:Spshu/Sandbox3. It looks good and has more than enough references to meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). I think it's about time to move it to the NBC Owned Television Stations page. Powergate92 Talk 02:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
←Where is your evidence that it still exists, King Shadeed? Your own "proof" is to latch on to two marketing executive titles and ignore the presents of two chairs for NBC Entertainment and NBC Broadcasting and that the page is for NBC ENTERTAINMENT not NBCU TV Group. Neither person's job description in their bio indicates that they jointly run NBCU TV Group but that they report directly to NBCU's CEO. Spshu ( talk) 13:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
There's no point on moving the page to NBC Entertainment since that's a different division. This discussion is over. King Shadeed 20:26, October 11, 2012 (UTC)
←The SUBJECT IS NOT CLOSED nor can you declare it closed. As my last post showed I did "read on who is in charge". Marketing is a support function in most companies and thus not in charge. You continue to fail to read and conprend my posts. -- Spshu ( talk) 15:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Marvel Studios shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 19:20, 10 October 2012 (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. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 18:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
VernoWhitney ( talk) 17:19, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, the current article isn't anything like the previous article (which was mostly an ad) and does attest notability with references that are dated after the previous deletion discussion. If someone wants to list it for deletion again, I can't stop it, but as it stands, it's fine by me. -- Bobet 20:52, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Spshu. Hope you're well; haven't heard from you in a while. I'm curious about the notability tag you placed at Topps Comics. As I wrote on the talk page, it was a well-established company that produced a large number of high-profile products by major comics creators and featuring many major licensed properties. I'd urge you to place a rationale on the talk page, since without it, there's no way to address any specific concerns. Honestly, on the face of it, Im perplexed as to why the tag is there, and without a rationale people can respond to, it doesn't really stand on its own. Hoping to hear from you. With regards, -- Tenebrae ( talk) 20:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I see that you are about to remove the MLG Productions article. I just wanted to have a solo article about it. TheWikiMan95 Mario Saenz 16:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey all :).
I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).
You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office connect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 23:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
You've recently been adding the Star Wars character Yoda to The Muppets template. I want to clarify why your edits are incorrect and have been undone.
I hope this message clarifies the inconsistencies that were evident in your edits. Thank you. ~
Jedi94 (
talk) 02:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
1. The Muppet template wasn't limit itself to the "The Muppet Show" franchises. This is appearently your own view of it.
2a. You give no such source for this and there isn't one in the Yoda article for Freeborn's creating Yoda.
2b. Henson's Company as Oz was assign to Yoda in the creation of Yoda.
2c. They called it a muppet do to Henson's involvement in its creation that has been the designation for Henson's puppets. It is your personal opinion about it being tongue in cheek.
2d. Of course, Yoda status doesn't change, it is a muppet in common usage. But with the Lucasfilm purchase it can be consider a "Muppet".
3. This all (below) came out when Big Bird was brought up in the 2012 Presidential Campaign.
3a. No Disney refers to the as
Disney's The Muppets. Sesame Workshop purhased the right to call their muppets
Muppets from EM TV and isn't subject to Disney; the trademark was split.
3b. Incorrect, muppets are created by
Jim Henson's Creature Shop as that is where Sesame Workshop gets their Muppets as they have no in house creation facilities.
Spshu (
talk) 14:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi! It looks like you've been challenging the notability of a number of high-profile Muppets performers. I am confused by this, as the two articles I spot-checked both are performers who at a glance easily fulfill the notability guidelines in WP:ENT. I've removed the flag, and put justification on the Talk page. Is there a reason you are doing this? -- Metahacker ( talk) 15:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
(edit) Looking at it further, you are also deleting content, including sourced content and references, from these pages with no explanation but "Nota." <a href=" https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Cheryl_Wagner&diff=prev&oldid=528677096">example 1</a>, <a href=" https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jerry_Nelson&diff=prev&oldid=528673556">example 2</a>. What reason do you have for this behavior? -- Metahacker ( talk) 15:40, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place concerning the changes that have been made at Template:The Muppets.
The article will be discussed at Template talk:The Muppets#Shortening names until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and policies and guidelines relevant to Wikipedia. ~ Jedi94 ( talk) 00:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Holiday Cheer | ||
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer 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. Share the good feelings. |
Just curious as to what you mean about Walling's religion and such not being confirmed. I posted a link. He attends a United Methodist church; he has offered that much. He doesn't have to officially announce his religion for us to list one at Wikipedia. I also think it's silly you removed his party affiliation. You are being too cute by a half and a bit overly careful/protective for whatever reason. -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 02:54, 28 December 2012 (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. N-HH talk/ edits 21:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Template:Kraft Foods Group a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a " cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I am the editor who created the Kanbar Entertainment article and am unsure why you removed the references that you did. According to Wikipedia policy ( WP:Primary), primary sources are allowed as long as they are used as references for non-controversial facts, as was the case with the coryedwards.com reference and the interworks.com reference. The northsidesf.com reference was a professional magazine, so I can't see why that one would be a problem. The fullecirclestuff blog reference consisted of an interview with the film's director and I had verified its authenticity by including a page from the director's official website where he mentions and links to the interview. I first used this reference on the Hoodwinked! article and before including it there, asked whether it would be acceptable at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I was told that it would probably be okay, and since then Hoodwinked! has passed a Featured Article nomination without anyone opposing the reference.
I would also like to discuss the studio's notability. According to Wikipedia's notability guidelines ( WP:ORG), an organization or company is notable if it has received significant coverage by reliable and independent sources. I feel that the article from Variety about the lawsuit between Kanbar Entertainment and the Weinstein Company is at least one demonstration of "significant coverage". While the studio is not the primary subject of the other references, the guidelines simply state that multiple sources are needed if the subject is not discussed in great depth by any of them. Kanbar Entertainment is mentioned in at least three other independent reliable sources (The Northside magazine, the LA Times blogpost, which was written by a staff writer, and the Tulsa World newspaper). The guidelines don't specify how many sources are needed, and while these four certainly do not constitute a lot of coverage, I do feel that they provide enough coverage. -- Jpcase ( talk) 01:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
While it is apparent your good intention to give the Walt Disney Animation Studios article a superior quality, you must be careful when doing this. There was excessive use of "citation needed", in many cases absurd, as in the first paragraph of the 1950s section (now fixed).
It is also important to prevent unnecessary information in the article. A previous version of Circle 7 Animation history in the article made it seem that the studio had some connection with Walt Disney Animation Studios, while the only thing that connected the two studios was that the C7A employees moved to WDAS. This will be fixed.
Another issue was the removal of the introduction paragraph of the article. Although the second paragraph contained duplicate information, remotion of the third paragraph was completely wrong. There was no duplicated information in it and was consistent with what was proposed by the Article development and The perfect article official guides. This will also be fixed.
Anyway, keep doing the good job, but taking care to avoid excess, unnecessary information and things that are not really connected to WDAS.
Tim Week ( talk) 22:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Tim Week
At the news that you've linked is very clear that "the unit, which is being kept separate from Disney's main feature animation division". C7A was never any subdivision or studio of WDAS, the only thing that once linked the history of the studios was that the C7A have been closed and the employees moved to WDAS, nothing more.
And my complaint about the removal of content was only related to the fact that this occurred during the introductory paragraphs of the article, something vital for the presentation of the studio for a reader. I will make the restoration of vital parts, then disregard what I said before.
Tim Week ( talk) 00:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Tim Week
What criterion are you using to consider that articles with dozens of references from reliable sources do not meet the WP:GNG? Diego ( talk) 21:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
←Still, from the book's name it isn't primarily about Birdo. Spshu ( talk) 13:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
When Mattel and Fisher-Price is no longer own HIT Entertainment next year. Disney acquires this company and deal is due to be finalized in February 2014. Sent me a message please and contact Disney if you can. SmallSoldiers123 ( talk)
" [article] at Don Markstein's Toonopedia" is the consensus format across WikiProject Comics. Its consistent use marks a consensus. It's important to have stylistic consistency, so I've restored the citation to the way it's generally seen throughout WPC. I hope you understand and can go along with this standardized form. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
You are removing factual content under your claims of removing FB and Twitter links. For one, FB and Twitter are acceptable SPS sources if we can verify the owner. But the other details you are removing are factually correct and so your edits appear to be completely improper. -- MASEM ( t) 20:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
←No I can if it is not source, I can remove it since they are not proper sources. Spshu ( talk) 21:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
←You cannot confirm it, just your claims as having done so. Twitter is a blog (micro) and are consider unrealible. They are primary source, no original research is allowed here. Spshu ( talk) 22:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. MASEM ( t) 20:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I have noticed that you have removed some information from article " Lauren Faust" ( [11], [12]). Now, the reasoning is obviously similar to the one you used for the article " My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic", discussed above ( [13]). However, that discussion concerns content and I would like to make a behavioral point (well, maybe more).
Looking at your last edits I have seen many cases when you removed information without references or with references that you have found insufficient. That didn't happen just in the articles I have mentioned, but also in " Primate (bishop)" ( [14]). Now, it is true that all material should have good sources, but I think there are several problems with your approach.
First, the removals look rather hasty. In none of these cases the information looked obviously wrong. Couldn't the information without sources get Template:Citation needed? And the information with suspicious sources - Template:Unreliable source? And the information which is not confirmed by the given source - Template:Not in source? And then, after the template stays for some time - a week, a month, a year - the information could be removed without the conflicts. Or it could be sourced instead. As you can see, doing otherwise can end up less well...
Second, it would have been preferable to explain your reasoning. While in some cases it could be guessed easily, the edit summaries saying "remove FB & twitter source info; shorten opening;" ( [15]) cannot be easily understood to say that you think that it is not certain that the authorship of the sources hasn't been demonstrated ( [16]). A post on the talk page would have made your reasoning much clearer.
By the way, you should also participate in the discussions that already exist. In case of " Primate (bishop)" you have reverted User:Irish Melkite ( [17]) without answering him on the talk page ( [18])...
Third, you should revert less... [19], [20], [21], [22]... More discussion, less reverting.
Finally, some more effort to find references could prove beneficial. For example, it was not that hard to find out that " Nostra Aetate" of the Second Vatican Council ( [23]) has a signature (among others, of course): "† Ego ANDREAS ROHRACHER, Archiepiscopus Salisburgensis, Primas Germaniae."... That would be a very good indicator that Archbishop of Salzburg is "Primas Germaniae", wouldn't you agree..?
So, I hope that things will get calmer soon and everything will be solved. -- Martynas Patasius ( talk) 19:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
You may wish to join in the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard discussion on Code of Canon Law as reliable source for Catholic canon law and GCatholic.org. Esoglou ( talk) 09:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Any reason why you think he's not notable? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Was there any other reason to add the "Primary sources" tag? I have discussed this in Talk:Dungeons & Dragons/Archives/ 8#Article issues? You can discuss it there. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:12, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Please stop adding links to other navboxes in existing navboxes. Please read WP:NAVBOX and WP:Navigation templates to understand how they work. They are there to provide links to existing articles. -- Rob Sinden ( talk) 18:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your help cleaning up the AIG article. Do you have a quick moment to look at this section [30]? Right now, it has no context to anything. The original sponsorship post had context. Could we find a way to incorporate this chronologically in an existing element and remove this standalone entry. Let's do that? By the way, I'm working on correcting the chronology and grammatical errors in the article. I am also working on distinguishing the financial crisis from AIG's repayment of the loan. Thanks for helping out. Hiland109 ( talk) 17:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the work on updating the Sponsorship section into the History chronology. I'm working on expanding the history of AIG. Interested to collaborate? Hiland109 ( talk) 15:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Why did you delete the Dream Quest Images article and redirect to Disney Animation, rather than simply appending your summary of Dream Quest's work to the Disney page and linking to the main article? In doing so, you've eliminated valuable historical information (credit list, for example) as well as the original article's history. Hats off to Disney Animation and all, but I think some wiki readers might be interested to learn more about Dream Quest. Please consider replacing the original article by undoing your edit and then link to that from your Disney Animation article. Tekkonkinkreet ( talk) 14:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand your combative response, but I'm sorry to have bothered you. Please note that I didn't revert your changes or make any edits to your article. I was simply asking for an explanation for your deleting some useful information about DQI. I don't want to argue with you about the relative notability of " Disney animation studios" and DQI - obviously we disagree. But it seems to me that notability, by itself, doesn't really justify your having actually deleted the original article. And I might add that the fact that no one responded to your query for comments does not excuse your actions either. You might have simply added a DQI section to your " Disney animation studios" article and referenced the original article for those interested in a more detailed discussion of DQI's history. That, it seems to me, would have achieved your goal of incorporating DQI to the " Disney animation studios" article while also allowing for expansion of the DQI article beyond what might be relevant to a discussion of " Disney animation studios" as a whole. (An example: Microsoft acquired Skype, but there remains a Skype Technologies article). Again, I'm sorry for any inconvenience my question has caused you. Tekkonkinkreet ( talk) 16:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Am I correct in understanding that your main criticism is a lack of external sources? Not to contradict anything you've said, I will just mention here that the bulk of DQ's innovation was prior to the Disney acquisition, as a visual effects company, not as an animation company. Visual effects industry experts I've spoken with on the subject (including three I spoke with at Disney Animation in May of this year) are quick to acknowledge DQ's having taken the art of visual effects to a new level at a crucial period of transition from photo-mechanical (so-called "analog") VFX to digital (CGI) techniques. The fact that DQ was not very adept at promoting its own work to the public is an unfortunate one. Regardless, I'm currently collecting print sources that cover DQ's work (industry and popular press as well as a few books) and hope you'll reconsider allowing DQ it's own page in addition to the mention in your Disney animation studios article once I've got this together. Thank you. Tekkonkinkreet ( talk) 03:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)Notability isn't transferable, so winning Oscars or other awards doesn't necessarily make DQI/Secret Lab notable.
A Google search leads to a trip to the LA Times search engine, and the LA Times wrote quite a few articles on Dream Question Images: http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/dream-quest-images. It makes me no personal nevermind, but according to the rules, significant third party coverage, major achievements in field in question, and Academy Awards would very much make it notable as a histroical topic. Its later acquisition by Disney should not render this invalid. -- FuriousFreddy ( talk) 19:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Are there any reasons you insist that...
-- 98.26.30.240 ( talk) 20:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems that you mean to show support for Keeping the templates, but you never officially bolded any such sentiment at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_July_4#Template:U._S._Network_Shows_footer.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 13:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
I reverted your edits to Bay City, Michigan because you removed information such as the makeup of "West Bay City" being comprised of Banks, Salzburg, and Wenona. Also, consolidating the limited information you left under the section "Neighborhood" makes little sense, as it belongs in the "History" section.-- Asher196 ( talk) 20:17, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
WildStorm. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. postdlf ( talk) 03:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Imprints of DC Comics, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth ( talk) 19:38, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I have given my explanation - the extra reference tags are not needed in the infobox, just sourcing the new, unknown production company. And your reverting of the citation, is not consistent to how the sources are used on the page. Favre1fan93 ( talk) 21:42, 5 August 2013 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Favre1fan93 (Result: ). Thank you. Favre1fan93 ( talk) 21:44, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Please read WP:SELFSOURCE and note that it is acceptable to use Twitter as a source about information about themselves or their works. You may also wish to take a note of the following policies WP:BRD, WP:3RR and WP:EW and remember to discuss changes on a talk page. -- MisterShiney ✉ 21:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
This is a notice that there is a discussion involving yourself at Talk:Marvel Television#August 2013 content dispute. I invite to please come and participate. Thank you.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I no longer edit TV stations, mostly because of you. So you are now edit-warring across numerous TV station articles with yourself. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Apparently you failed to understand the reason not to change the information on the Tribune Entertainment page. I read the source from "Broadcasting & Cable", where it says in the article "Tribune has named Warner Bros. executive Matt Cherniss president/general manager of WGN America and the newly formed Tribune Studios.". Tribune Studios is a new entity of the Tribune Company and is not formerly known as Tribune Entertainment, where that company was shut down after Tribune announced to end its television distribution business says here. If Tribune Entertainment was renamed Tribune Studios, all sources would've said so, therefore they didn't. So this is your warning to you regarding to this information before you end up edit warring, which is against rules and regulations here at Wikipedia. Edit warring can cause you to get blocked from editing. Read the sources properly next time without starting any trouble, and have a nice day. Thank you. 99.46.226.13 ( talk) 01:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Block message:
original block message
Decline reason: Procedural decline; open-proxy review requests must be made at the IP talk page. — Daniel Case ( talk) 19:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Spshu, happy to meet you :-) We appear to have a conflict concerning the interpretation of the CE article, and in particular, as you say, the first paragraph, as nowhere do I find anything close in meaning to "This particular church is also referred to by the name Italo-Greek Catholic Church [no objections to this part], which is derived from the Italo-Greek (Italo-Græcus) demonym which was traditionally used to classify the inhabitants of Southern Italy and Sicily; people who are modern day Italians but are historically of Greek origin." IMHO you are making confusion in part due to the outdated nature of the source which tends to uniform Greeks and Albanians, whichin Italy have long been felt as one due to there common Byzantine origin. The article then continues in the first paragraph to apply those that are part of the church: 1) old ecclesiastical communities; 2) all those Greek colonies founded by Greek merchants in important Italian maritime cities; 3) the Greek and Albanian minorities present on Italian soil, especially the latter. Adding a personal opinion, I suspect this article is rather outdated (1913) and that in the meanwhile Greek and Albanian minorities in Italy have been separated (I find it extremely tough to believe the Greek minority would have stayed in a church called "Italo-Albanian"). I hope to have persuaded you; if not at all, well maybe we should try some sort of dispute resolution. Aldux ( talk) 15:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
On August 27 when updating the Flint Metro League article to reflect the upcoming changes to that league beginning in 2014, I noticed in this revision that you changed the table from the one I had put there in March and said that you had "restored sourced version." I had kept the sources in my revision but had presented the information in a more conventional table and narrative.
IMHO, the table on the current revision of the article is awkward and cumbersome. I've never seen information presented in a table that way. I think that a more conventional table with a graphical timeline would be appropriate (I had done both of these things on the Big Nine Conference article), but I'd like to know what you think. Dafoeberezin3494 ( talk) 21:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm starting a discussion here so our explanations aren't restricted by edit summaries, and to avoid any future edit warring at Walt Disney Pictures.
I'd like to know what you're trying uphold between Walt Disney Pictures and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures. In this edit, you claimed that WDP and WDSMP are the same and yet in these subsequent edits [32] [33] you're telling Trivialist and I to stop mixing them up (which we're not, we have them as seprate units). What exactly are you asserting?
WDP is a production company/film label/banner/brand. WDSMP is the The Walt Disney Studios' overall theatrical distribution division, which distributes films from other units besides WDP (including Marvel, Touchstone, and Disneynature). That's essentially what Trivialist and I are trying to keep intact. Also, the reason as to why there is a "Not to be confused with..." at the article's top, is to disambiguate WDP from WDSMP, since they both have similarly-sounding names.
Like I explained in one of my edit summaries, your edits have absolutely no reputable sources to back them up. That makes your edits original research and fair game for us to revert them on that basis alone. The article already had sources proving that Walt Disney Pictures is a film label and now, all of a sudden, you're changing up the whole article and removing such references. Examples include;
Thanks. I hope to expect a civil and timely response soon. ~ Jedi94 ( talk) 20:29, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
So, Walt Disney Studios isn't an "reputable sources" about the name of its units? "[ But per Walt Disney Studios, what we call Walt Disney Pictures is called Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures and per the Walt Disney Co.'s Our businesses page: The Walt Disney Studios states "Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures" - "Industry: Live-Action Film Production" Business Week also indicates that "Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Inc. operates as a motion picture and television feature distribution company." Business Week also shows separate presidents of Disney Studios Motion Pictures for production and distribution."
unit | formed | Pre-drop of BV name | Current full name |
---|---|---|---|
production | 1950 | Walt Disney Pictures (?) | Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Production |
distribution | 1953 | Buena Vista Pictures Distribution Co. | Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Distribution |
Now since you didn't show me where the answer to my questions is and you acted all moany and huffy, the article has been protected. We could have even made a deal, but no, you just undid my edits because you think they aren't correct. 78.146.191.228 ( talk) 20:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
That's strange. I don't remember a Jetix Play in UK. TDFan2006 ( talk) 20:41, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
If Jetix Play in UK was Telewest exclussive and it closed in 2007, how did Jetix Play close in 2010? The Toon Disney Guy ( talk) 09:34, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Justice League 3000 receives significant coverage in reliable sources. All of those sources are deemed reliable sources by Wikipedia standards. Dream Focus 20:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Spshu, I have blocked you for 24 hours for edit warring, which should have been an obvious outcome of you continuing to revert other editors at Justice League 3000. postdlf ( talk) 21:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Spshu, you are wikilawyering and I'm not playing that game with you. I blocked you to stop further edit warring, noting only that there were multiple editors disagreeing with you regardless of what you think the correct guideline interpretation is. I didn't even realize it at the time I blocked you, but I personally warned you on this talk page for the same kind of edit warring in the same subject area just a few months ago. And you are all over the archives of the edit warring noticeboard, having already received multiple warnings going back more than a year. You will discuss disagreements, and you will respect the consensus of other editors instead of reverting to get your way. Further conduct of the same kind will result in additional blocks. postdlf ( talk) 18:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, postdlf, you seem to have failed to do any investigation of Dream Focus who has 350 trips to the Admin Noticeboards and is a know super-inclusionist. And 3 editors (Dream Focus, IP editor & Masem) is not multiple editors by any definition, heck I have had 5 to 2 called no consensus and 7 to 1 called thin consensus. Masem, thanks for discussing the matter even if we don't agree, unlike other.
Audience
The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary.
Independence of sources
A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon it.
WP:SIGCOV: "The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected." "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Spshu ( talk) 14:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget "...media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; .." Spshu ( talk) 20:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I noticed you changed some callsigns on the O&O TV page to the base callsigns as opposed to their actual F.C.C.-issued callsign (e.g.: KCNC-TV is the legal call, not KCNC). The full legal callsign should always be displayed, not the base. Stereorock ( talk) 21:10, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I've moved it back to the article namespace - the article has worth, as some of the imprints do lack general content, it just needs to be cleaned up a bit. Also, you originally moved the article into a userpage namespace, rather than a sandbox sub-page under your own user page; don't know if it was intentional, but it didn't seem like it. || Tako ( bother me) || 21:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
In regards to the article Major film studio, I have attempted tell an IP editor that there isn't a conflict over Lionsgate, but the editor continues to revert ruining viewability of the full table and reinstating improper classificiation of some film units. I request page protection for the page, but was rebuffed being told to seek sanctions. So I am unsure where to go as the only sanction is article sanction, which I am not sure it fits. And I have an administrator that hold against me for even showing up at 3RR. What should I do? Spshu ( talk) 13:42, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for writing that article! One thing is that things need to be written in past tense (you would write in present tense if you are describing the plot of a fictional book/movie/etc).
Anyway I decided to beef up the Inkster school district page. They closed too... WhisperToMe ( talk) 00:37, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. You've participated in discussions on KCAL-TV. Can you offer your opinion about the inclusion of material in an article that's taking place in this consensus discussion, in which the reliability of that source is one of the issues that was raised (among others)? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 18:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
You moved the article on the comic from Pow! to Pow! (comic) and created a disambiguation page at its title, but you have not fixed the large number of incoming links to the comic which now point to the dab page. Please either fix all those links, or consider reverting your move and coping with the company and the album in a hatnote on the comic's article. It's your responsibility to clean up after creating a dab page in this way - there's a note to say so which appears during the move operation. Pam D 23:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Jeff Blake IS considered as one of the main key personnel in Sony Pictures. He is the executive vice chairman of the company. Read here Who are you to say that he is NOT?? 99.46.224.17 ( talk) 13:55, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and proposed that Iron Man: Rise of Technovore be split at Talk:Marvel Anime. Feel free to participate in the discussion. Also, the attempt to split seems to be entirely in good faith to me, and saying it isn't is quite rude to the person trying to split it. Keep in mind that it is normal for article content to be copied from one place in Wikipedia to another when things are split or merged, and that User:Raamin complied with the bare minimum requirements for copying content by listing the article it was copied from in the edit summary. Saying the information was "swiped" is inaccurate, as the copying of the information complied with Wikipedia guidelines. Also, please note WP:3RR, which states that it is against policy to revert an article more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. It looks like you reverted Iron Man: Rise of Technovore 4 times in the last 24 hours. Please don't edit war in that fashion. If you continue to do so, it is possible that you will be blocked from editing in the future. Calathan ( talk) 23:56, 23 January 2014 (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.
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
below this notice, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Bbb23 (
talk) 00:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)Sorry, Bbb23, but it looks like you didn't bother to look at my defense at the ANI board. Can you, Bbb3, respond to Rammin over at Talk:Marvel_Anime#Proposed_split_of_Iron_Man:_Rise_of_Technovore that Ultimate Avengers 2 shouldn't exist and that I am working on Marvel Animated Features article in my user space and that what is happening with other articles isn't necessarily valid with others. But hay we would want to discussion any thing. Some times I think I can work it out with the other editor in vis via the edit summary and some times we have. And other ignore any discussion what so ever, so they can own the article. Spshu ( talk) 00:52, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Evrik. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Pinewood derby because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You may want to discuss such a major change first. -- evrik ( talk) 19:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Playhouse Disney may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
It's a "parent category", not "indirectly in that category". Please use standard wiki terminology in your edit summaries, OK? (thanks) Montanabw (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
There is an IP address who wants to talk about Citizens Republic Bancorp in the present tense even though the corporate entity no longer exists. Please monitor the article. Thank you. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 18:50, 27 February 2014 (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. DiverScout ( talk) 17:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Spshu, could you take another look at this edit of yours. There are a couple of grammatical issues and I don't want to take a stab at fixing it if I guess incorrectly. The first issue is "the Jim Henson Productions". That sounds odd. The second is "On April 1, 2004, the company and The Jim Henson Company..." I assume the first company is HiT? Thanks, not trying to be a smartass, just unsure of what you were getting at. Regards, Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 23:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Frisbee (TV channel) is worthy of note, is one of the seven major channels for children italian television ( Source: Auditel Nielsen TAM); then Switchover Media no longer exists but was purchased and incorporated in Discovery Italia Srl.-- 79.9.17.139 ( talk) 19:03, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Independent Scout and Scout-like organizations in the United States, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth ( talk) 19:12, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of programs broadcast by Toon Disney.
Ahecht (
TALK
PAGE) 17:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I apologize that I haven't had a chance to find your edit, but I would like to discuss these edits here.
1. Please do not remove a website just because "website will most likely be shut down at some point" - Please don't do that. By removing the old website URL people who are not computer literate won't be able to find out where the old website was. Why is this important? Because we want people to be able to easily access the saved copies of the old websites.
The Wayback Machine at http://web.archive.org saves copies of old websites. http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/ is now dead. However... http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/ is very much accessible and people can learn about the old district by going through its webpages from the past. If you remove the old URL people may not know where the old website was. In this revision I added the links to the website archives.
2. Re: "image doesn't prove location just mailing address"
The edit was well meaning but it removed the citation. The image at http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/images/headers/1/header_19269963_c1353988139.jpg was the header of the website and it was stating the physical location address (which happens to be the mailing address).
Unfortunately, specifically that image cannot be viewed on the wayback machine: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bvsd.k12.mi.us/images/headers/1/header_19269963_c1353988139.jpg is blocked for some reason WhisperToMe ( talk) 05:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
1. This isn't our or my responsibility. If you want to link to the Wayback Machine then link via the Wayback Machine, don't come here and lecture me. Linking to the old website don't do them any good when they expect to click on them that they work.
2. No, the image citation places it in Saginaw ("705 N. Towerline Road, Saginaw, MI 48601") NOT Buena Vista Charter Township, the information it was suppose to be supporting. It is a general mistake that the mailing address is the physical location address. It just is the post office that deliveries the mail there as the GNIS FAQ 27 indicates: "Therefore, the ZIP Code boundary in no way indicates a legal “footprint” of a named community, is not official for purposes other than delivering mail, and changes periodically." So there for is NOT considered a reliable source for locations. Spshu ( talk) 19:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I wish to discuss your recent edits to these two templates. The reason those links are along the top of the templates is because they are the core articles for the subject. Your removal of them and substitution as section titles with less than descriptive titles makes it harder for people to understand what the link to. That is why I reverted your changes. If you feel that there is a substation reason why these changes should be made, please discuss it on the talk page per bold, revert and discuss.
Also, please do place allegations of unsubstantiated misuse of tools in your edit summaries, it goes against one of our central tenants of assuming good faith --- Jeremy ( blah blah • I did it!) 23:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I will admit that I too did not check the source links beforehand over at the Disk Wars page. However as the person citing that some of the info is unsourced, at least check if all of the source links have relevant info that can connect to the page. The T.M Revolution link also sources the kids and voice actors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.134.219 ( talk) 15:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I don't understand why you remove my contribution. I checked my sources and watched the show. So, I think I knows a thing or two about it too. Everybody is allowed to contribute to Wikipedia as long they don't make themselves nuisance. My english might not be 100% correct (because it's not my mother language) but I don't see anything wrong with adding a description in the character section about Captain America and Wasp. Have a nice day. comment add by 109.133.130.6 ( talk) 07:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Please read WP:NAC and WP:NACD. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 15:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I think the issue here is that you seem not to have noticed (correct me if I'm wrong here) that the lists are significantly different between the articles. Simply merging them would just not be possible. (I will admit, though, that I did not notice the date on that comment you mention - had I noticed it I might have held off closing the discussion a little longer.) Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 20:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jetix shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Liz Read! Talk! 17:12, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
You have begun an edit-war at Marvel Comics, going so far as to gratuitously label an edit you disagree with as "vandalism." It clearly was not, and was adhering to longstanding WPC practices. Before making a unilateral, undiscussed, over-the-top change affecting hundreds of articles, DISCUSS it, please, or I will ask an admin to intervene. WP:BRD, like it says above. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 13:57, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Please actually read what a citation links to before assuming you are right and undoing a valid edit. Check out the talk page for List of Avengers members. 86.184.121.147 ( talk) 20:39, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USDTV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lifetime ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:58, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Please stop reverting my edits. There are sources for the programming. There are many such as the Foxtel TV guide and the website. At least look on the TV guide for proof. 66.87.81.34 ( talk) 20:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Abbreviations can be confusing for readers (and until your edit there was no reference as to what they meant) that is why I initially spelled them out. It was for clarity. I still think that someday the abbreviations should be removed and everything spelled out. Wikicontributor12 ( talk) 22:11, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted the cast and crew list references for The 7D to point to the Disney press release on April 3, as that is the earliest of the articles to name the cast members for the show. The Animation World article was posted April 25 and rewords the press release. Similarly, Broadway World uses the press release information. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 17:32, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I understand that this network was rebranded ( FYI), but since the owner is the same and the Bio. page is short, there is no need for a new page. For examples of this Wikipedia tradition in play for recent rebrandings, see: CBS Sports Network, Destination America, Esquire Network, Fox Sports 2, TruTV, Velocity, and many others... -- Chris1294 July 8, 2014 16:37
Hi, it looks like someone's adding Jetix programs again for List of programs broadcast by Toon Disney. I remember they were spun off to the other article, but should they be listed in both places? - AngusWOOF ( talk) 16:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Jetix shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD 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. AlanS ( talk) 19:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I haven't been following it lately since I've been trying to stay away from Ttll's disputes (they've been arguing over what to call an unaired show on Vortexx for the last month, whether unaired or other; I say unaired, they want other, I'm not going to get blocked for that so I withdrew). I personally implored for more sources when I created the RD for Xploration, but they're usually deaf ear notes. Nate • ( chatter) 01:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Regarding List of Disney XD TV channels, you didn't answer my question, how are you ordering the table? Also, could you please be more specific about what sourced information I removed? I am still hoping to improve the list. Thanks, 117Avenue ( talk) 02:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at KBJR-TV. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. There is a certain style and format that the majority of TV station articles use, particularly in regards to the infobox and presence of digital subchannels. Could you please STOP trying to force your practices under the guise of "cleanup"? ViperSnake151 Talk 15:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
The "group" you keep reverting it back to is at best just a paper-only division within SPE covering Columbia and maybe TriStar, and is NOT clearly referenced as the actual "parent" of ANY studio (much less Columbia). SPE is well-known as the immediate corporate parent of *ALL* of Sony's studio arms (including the lesser ones), and is well-documented as such (until late 2013 Columbia's logo used the tagline "A Sony Pictures Entertainment Company"; then it was shortened to "A Sony Company" like most of the others). SPE is the closest equivalent in Sony's corporate structure of most of the others listed in the "Studio Parent" column; the one most like CTMPG is Paramount Motion Pictures Group, but then there's not many alternatives in "new" Viacom's corporate structure between the parent & Paramount proper (especially after CBS got the TV side -- yes I know this is about films, but all the major studios except Paramount also shoot TV shows on their lots). Maybe YOU need to reconsider... -- RBBrittain ( talk) 05:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Your article, FYI (TV network) has been marked for speedy deletion because it covers a topic on which we already have a page – Fyi (TV network).
If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ViperSnake151 Talk 22:29, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I notice your one of the editors who won't give up the name Xploration Nation? I am begging you to correct this mistake and Fix the page. The 2 hour block for STEM Shows are called "Xploration Station". I work for Steve Rotfeld Productions. We just updated our website this week with all new information and new press links. You can easily see the Block is called Xploration Station and all the links refer you to the Xploration Social media sites. www.rotfeldproductions.com. My Boss is all upset that Wikipedia is having so much difficulty fixing this mistake. We changed the name of the block almost 4 months ago.
Mjay931979 ( talk) 20:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)mjay931979
I understand we only recently updated the site as of this week actually. I'm not saying Nation wasn't the name for a long time, we were selling it as Nation, but we found there was a problem with using the name Xploration Nation and we had to change it to Xploration Station. What would you consider a real source if none of what I suggested works? Links to social media sites? Our website is now updated and Xploration Station has it't own page. The press release you were using was from last year and at the time it was Xploration Nation, but the block is premiering the week of September 8th. There will be a lot more press in the coming weeks. If any of these work let me know. Mjay931979 ( talk) 11:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)mjay931979
Hey, thanks for the comments. Actually, I've found more searches relating to the public company, than the private LLC, on sites such as BusinessWeek. In any event, to have the LLC in the infobox and suggest the LLC is publicly traded is incorrect. -- Tærkast ( Discuss) 13:05, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I added the sources back that show that Xploration Animal Science and Animal Science are related. The Steve Rotfield page says that Xploration Animal Science is an Emmy-nominated show, but the news articles show that Animal Science is the one that received the nominations. Anyway I threw in a press kit link for season 1 for the Xploration Animal Science version to confirm the number of episodes and the start date. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 16:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I know I didn't agree with you in the past about removing news stations staff members, but I have recently decided to agree, and that it makes much more since. So with that being said, I've started to remove non-notable staff members (per WP:LISTPEOPLE) from the articles as well as unsourced titles/slogans. Right now, I have a user (User:Jamesbondfan) that keeps reverting my edits without a valid reason. I had left a message on his talk page today explaining why and a quote from User:Aoidh from the WIBW-TV talk page. I don't want to get in an edit war with this user, so I'm reaching out to you who is doing the same thing... removing non-notable staff. You know much more than I do about these kind of things and could probably explain it better than I could. As of right now (14:05 Central), Jamesbondfan has not replied back to me, just reverted edits. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 19:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Warner Bros. owns New Line Television the producer of that show — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.23.43 ( talk) 15:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
New Line Televion produces the series so its has be in the Cetegory Television series by Warner Bros. Television — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.23.43 ( talk) 13:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
regarding dario melendez there is a citation from the same place florida news journal blog and i'll even add the wisconsin/milwaukee journal centinal and his sacred heart profile to prove it
Your recent editing history at Duchy of Cornwall shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD 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. DuncanHill ( talk) 15:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Your edits to this article claim a notability issue but in neither case do you express why you believe it fails. Please illuminate me. — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 22:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
( ←) Obviously, I disagree and, if only barely, I'm not the only one. — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 18:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Also, if I may be so bold as to offer a couple of suggestions for future use:
Meantime, please consider archiving your talk page. If I click the wrong link and get the whole page (rather than this one section), it takes forever to load up and even longer to attempt editing. :D — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 22:18, 12 October 2014 (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.
Stop adding dated information on the active production deals section of the Warner Bros. Pictures page. If you keep adding dated and false info on that page, I will assume that you are a vandal and I will notify an administrator. ( StephenCezar15 ( talk) 21:04, 24 October 2014 (UTC))
Hello,
You recently reverted some changes to this page because of citations of the Grand Comicbook Database (GCD), which you marked as an unreliable source. The Reliable Sources Noticeboard had a conversation about the GCD in November of 2012 that seemed, in the end, to determine that there is sufficient editorial oversight for it to count as reliable: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_137#Grand_Comics_Database
Additionally, the Wikipedia editor Psyphics lists the GCD as one of his "Reliable sources for comic book articles" /info/en/?search=User:Psyphics#Reliable_sources_for_comic_book_articles per Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics Cleanup (which no longer seems to have such a list attached). Would you mind providing a source or precedent for your claims that the GCD is NOT a reliable source? I'm still new here, and such information would be valuable to me. Cheers, Mquillig ( talk) 15:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
you have been getting into too many arguments. You may in right about most of them, but that isn't the point. The point is how to improve WP articles effectively , and this is best done by making the effort to keep a calm tone, and accepting that you;re not going to win all arguments. Some of use find it helpful to avoid using the other party's name in an argument or discussion; certainly it is helpful never to accuse anyone of anything. Most of us find it helpful when discussing a major issue, to avoid bringing in peripheral or subsidiary issues, and to focus on the article only, not on prior matters. If people complains about what you are doing, stick to the matter at hand, not their manner or possible misbehavior. Personally, I have a rule that I follow 95% of the time, of only speaking twice in any dispute: I say what I have to say,and I answer any misunderstandings. If I haven't convinced people by then, I'm not likely to do any better if I continue. DGG ( talk ) 22:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd be careful if I were you. You don't want to get blocked all because of an edit war on the Warner Bros. article, do you?? King Shadeed 19:24, October 29, 2014 (UTC)
Show me a rule, where decades aren't allowed as a section for an article?? King Shadeed 21:01, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
All you do is erase accurate information, owner/parent lists on infoboxes, and formatting. So don't do that again please! 68.98.224.182 ( talk) 01:25, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Stop reverting the pages, Spshu! If you keep doing it, I'll notify an admin, otherwise all the useful information would be lost FOREVER! Plain and simple! 68.98.224.182 ( talk) 22:16, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
If I may, could you at least consider leaving notes on the worst pages you two are in conflict over? And could you please explain to me your side of the story, so I can decipher which of you two is in the right on any count? Because I wish to find a solution to the conflict as quickly as possible. Thanks! -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 00:46, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
If I may... why isn't Ken Shapiro listed on the MGM template as MGM's COO? Just wondering, is all. -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 04:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reversions you have made on
One Magnificent Morning. Users are expected to
collaborate with others and avoid editing
disruptively.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
In addition, as part of your edit war, you are citing "source" material that has been found to be inaccurate. Your insistent citing and reposting of false source material as if it were "fact," is, by itself, grounds for being blocked. It is better to have no citation than any from false sources. If you continue to cite false source material, you may be blocked from editing, for this disruptive action as well, without further notice. IDriveAStickShift ( talk) 22:26, 14 December 2014 (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.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to United Artists may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:05, 23 December 2014 (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. 71.213.12.5 ( talk) 01:59, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 ( talk) 05:53, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
@ PhilKnight, Bbb23, JamesBWatson, and EdJohnston:
I am not using any IP in any attempt to contravene the block (all IP edits that I know of are were retag with a sig or listed here). I have been stopping a sock/IP loving editor that set a trap with a report of 3RR, which based on the edit summaries of Tt11213 amount to either a sock of his or quasi-vandalizer, who was pushing edits with out source, which I assume and revert with reason to force them to add a source or other appropriate action. The IP editor report me, so I complied with started a discussion to which Ttll213 edit with reversion and one with a source. Which I didn't notice, at first, which I admitted while indicating that it wasn't a reliable source. Meanwhile my counter report was too rote, thus ending up with my block.
Now it seems he has sprung a second phase attempting to get my block to a permanent band. He thus puts forth IP editors that agree with stopping the serial socker as my socks (note the filer reports himself).
Stop removing the dtv table and stop messing with the infobox as well! You are also violating WP:OWN by not letting anyone edit the page. 66.87.133.153 ( talk) 21:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
We do not put resolution/aspect ratio in infoboxes, they go in DTV tables. That's the way it's been, and that's the end of it! 2602:306:C5E4:24A0:2C13:7E54:4163:55C9 ( talk) 23:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Apparently, some local channels are distributed to other countries (Disney XD India, DXD Germany and Austria, DXD UK & Ireland) and some channels are for a group of countries (DXD Turkey, Middle East and Africa, DXD Asia), and some has different feeds (DXD US HD and SD-West, DXD+1 in some European countries, DXD+2 in Italy) and there are some channels that are a rip-off from existent channels (DXD ZA, DXD Scandinavian in Russian prove) and some channels don't exist (DXD Russia, which is a fanmade channel) Just saying. - Bankster1 ( talk) 22:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 03:20, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I note that you have reverted all of the edits I made to this article over the period of an hour and a half yesterday. This is unacceptable behaviour. At the very least, magazine titles are supposed to be in italics - at least fix those errors! Twofingered Typist ( talk) 14:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your edits to improve articles. Can you improve Nickelodeon (international), Boomerang (TV channel)#International, and List of international Cartoon Network channels similar to the way you did to Toon Disney, Disney Cinemagic, Jetix, Playhouse Disney, Disney Channels Worldwide, Disney Junior#List of Disney Junior versions, and List of Disney XD TV channels? Like adding sources, putting a summary table, and adding details?
Just saw an edit to a page I watch, and I saw something that surprised me. There is really a part of the Michigan statate constitution which allows for metropolitan government? Using this link, can you find the particular article? I'm really interested in this, and I bet most Michiganders didn't even know that this was a possibility. -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 08:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
One Magnificent Morning. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. 75.162.243.229 ( talk) 19:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Please take a look at the name of any Broadway theatre (there's a list in that article), and you will see it is spelled with "-re". Please take a look at the article on any prestiguous theatre company you've every heard of in NYC, and you'll see that it is almost invariably spelled "-re". ( Off-Broadway theatres, Off-Off Broadway) The tradition was long established in NYC -- one of the country's oldest cities -- well before the spelling change came about, and the theatres in the city (and in Boston and Providence and Philadelphia and most of the other older cities) use the "-re" spelling almost exclusively. The exception is movie theaters, which, for the most part, use the "-er" spelling unless they are converted vaudeville or legit theatres, in which case they invariable keep with the "-re" spelling. BMK ( talk) 21:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I need Spelling Premiere Network on WWOR! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.160.160.39 ( talk) 22:28, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Could somebody gave production deals on Universal Studios#Production deals page?
Why should gonna stay the Universal Studios#Production deals page as of 2012? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.217.120.32 ( talk) 00:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Swartz Creek Area Fire Department requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Zackmann08 ( talk) 22:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Swartz Creek Area Fire Department requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Zackmann08 ( talk) 21:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lin Sue Cooney. Since you had some involvement with the Lin Sue Cooney redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 00:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know I reverted your redirect at the above article. ALL high schools are considered notable. They do not have to meet gng or any other notability standard. They are notable by existence, just like geographic features. John from Idegon ( talk) 03:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Swartz Creek Area Fire Department is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swartz Creek Area Fire Department until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon ( talk) 18:59, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swartz Creek Area Fire Department, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. You have no way to know my motivation for anything I do. Did I discover this NN article by looking at your talk page? Yes. How does it follow that I did ANYTHING in "retaliation"? Remove your attack from the above article immediately or I will take you to ANI. Your editing is very tendentious. John from Idegon ( talk) 19:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
The Disney archive website is actually a very reliable and respected animation site for all the cancelled movies. It's very interesting and it deserves to stay there.
The article for the GOTG TV show should be moved back to the main space, making it a user page makes zero sense. Please move it to the main space. Npamusic ( talk) 21:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to La chaîne Disney, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 19:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
CARTT.ca is per the about page a one man website thus has no editorial oversite (" Cartt.ca is run by an experienced ::journalist.." from its about page) and hidden behind a subscription makes it difficult for me or any one else to confirm. Thus a substitution of a source that every one can confirm says. Primary are not strictly forbidden, they should definitely be removed when a general media new source is found that can source the same information. As per primary source, the WP article should not rely on them thus a major of the sources should not be primary sourced.
Typically, re-brandings of this nature do not get separate articles unless there is a major ownership change with a complete change in scope that is significant and detailed enough for its own article (i.e. Al Jazeera America), or the new network is technically and legally distinct from the previous one (Fox Sports 1). ViperSnake151 Talk 23:34, 1 August 2014+
See here and here. Airplaneman ✈ 22:56, 17 August 2015 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: ). Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Your assumption that this site was inherently unreliable because it is a "one-man band" seemed a bit questionable, so I did some digging and found more information about the author. He's worked at least 16 years as an independent telecommunications journalist and has had his sites described as "must-reads in the industry", and has been involved with industry functions (he moderated a panel at a Canadian telecom industry summit and cited by CBC in coverage of it). He does seem to have credentials and connections, so I guess in good faith we can assume that he is a reliable source. ViperSnake151 Talk 21:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
This website is absolutely a reliable source; there cannot be any reasonable doubt regarding this. Also, it is not completely unreadable without subscription, as it allows one free article before blocking readers. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 18:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Determining whether or not it is a reliable source is what the paywall is preventing. Spshu ( talk) 16:15, 26 August 2015 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Mdrnpndr (Result: ). Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 09:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Please don't, as you just did here and here. If you want to revert minor tidying up edits, whether made by me or anyone else, a good reason would help. N-HH talk/ edits 13:41, 26 August 2015 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Mdrnpndr (Result: ). Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 16:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Swarm ♠ 03:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Show me what guideline make it improper to create such a list, @ Bbb23:? This seems to part of Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks "that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead; or:"
Don't forget that you were the one to fall for the sock puppet that tricked you in banning me for stopping another disruptive editor. I had to post that while under your block. I should have appeal that block, but the guideline seem circular - admit you did it which should thus lock in your punishment, since you admit your guilt. Then not do it again - no one can guarantee that will not run into another disruptive editor. I have been a productive contributor and made productive edits that have turned into edit wars like the one I just got block for. 84.9% of edits have been on articles or templates. Sorry, you can not assume good faith thus unblock me or even offer an apology. I don't see your need to purposefully harass me by edit warring on my talk page. Spshu ( talk) 00:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Mdrnpndr ( talk) 00:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
I think you may want to archive your talk page by creating a new page called User talk:Spshu/Archive 1, then move the content of this talk page to that, and blank your current talk page for reuse. 1.) So it doesn't crash on old computers. 2.) I think there's a kilobyte limit on how much kilobytes can be included in the filesize of a page, which I saw on another MediaWiki, where I got an error saying I can't edit the page because I was going over the kilobyte limit. - EvilLair ( ✉ | c) 00:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello Spshu, Within the past hour I made edits to the Citizens Republic Wikipedia Page. I updated generic references to the bank to be more descriptive (i.e. it may have said Citizens but should have said Citizens National Bank). Could you clarify why you reverted all of those changes back to an earlier version? Thank you. Druedavid ( talk) 20:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Please stop removing shows from the program list without sufficient reason. I don't know what you mean by indiscriminate. Plus, these shows are sourced to ARCHIVED TV schedules which are reliable. Gatordragon ( talk) 21:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
You removed American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. as the corporate name for the TV network from the article for American Broadcasting Company (a.k.a. ABC) TV network. Your reason, or, in my opinion, excuse, for doing so was
American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. may be a IP holding co. or production holding co.
even though I previously stated that, in the ending credits for the TV show General Hospital (a.k.a. GH), the copyright notice states: © (Year) American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.. Now, after looking up the article for GH, in the show's infobox, it does indeed list the ABC TV network as the production & distribution company for the show. So, judging by that, one could then infer that American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. IS in fact the ABC TV network's corporate name. Another time that I re-inserted the corporate name, you said
see American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres for ABCompanies, Inc., the former AB-PT
Well, according to THAT article, the network was eventually known as ABCompanies, Inc. (as you referred to it) before taking on the name ABC Television, Inc. on July 8, 1986, while on that same date, a second company taking on the name ABCompanies, Inc. was formed. However, 3 years later, ABC Television was dissolved, which would then leave the new ABCompanies as the network's name. (the article for AB-PT has been edited to correlate with the information currently present/ed in the article for ABC)
Now, the thing is, ALL TV networks are businesses. And, businesses have corporate (or legal, according to Wikipedia) names (as well as some having trade names, which are indicated by DBA). CBS's corporate name is CBS Broadcasting, Inc., NBC's is NBCUniversal, Inc., The CW The CW Network, LLC, Fox (or FOX, depending on your preference) Fox Broadcasting Company, LLC, MyNetwork TV MyNetworkTV, Inc., & Ion Television Ion Television, Inc.. In the case of the ABC TV network, ABC, Inc. (d.b.a. Disney-ABC Television Group) wouldn't be the corporate name for the network, as that is actually ABC's parent company, similar to CBS Corp as CBS's parent, NBCU as NBC's, Fox Entertainment Group as Fox's, & Ion Media Networks as Ion Television's.
In fact, if you need anymore proof that the information I had inserted into the article is indeed correct, look up documentation for the court case Aereo is involved in against CBS, NBC, ABC, & Fox. In the documentation, ABC is listed by its corporate name, American Broadcasting Companies, Inc..
So, to conclude my little rant here, unless you can provide indisputable proof from a legitimate, credible source (like I did by linking to the Bloomberg Business profile for ABCompanies in the article or mentioning Aereo's court case here) that shows ABC as being anything other than American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., I expect you to re-insert American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. as the network's corporate name at your earliest convenience. 76.235.248.47 ( talk) 04:43, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Better yet, since you're probably (still) a little shaken up from the schooling I put you through, I'll re-insert the information myself, using a reference from the official website for the US Supreme Court, which should suffice as a legitimate, credible source for the information. 76.235.248.47 ( talk) 02:46, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Within the entertainment industry, "ABC Entertainment" is more often understood to mean the ABC network division responsible for ordering and scheduling. Nevertheless, the network does not produce entertainment programming.
←ABC Inc DBA Disney-ABC is not similar to CBS Corporation's Showtime Networks, etc. (off the top of my head, the only similar unit is Fox Networks Group) as they don't hold the broadcast properties, but lets move on. Just stating that you think American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. is American Broadcasting Company network is not proof. Nor is copyright proof. Disney-ABC can assign authorship thus copyrights to any subsidiary they want to (as they do on the film side with Disney Enterprises, Inc. and its subsidiaries like WALT DISNEY FEATURE ANIMATION FLORIDA, INC. that actually author/produce the works); they do not have to assign it to its network operating unit. I have seen ABC shows copyrighted by ABC Studios, so there is some probability that ABCos might be ABC Studios, but I have no proof. So, that there are suits filed against ABCos as they are likely over show issues, so that makes sense since Disney-ABC has designated it as copyright holder for most of its shows. That doesn't proof that it is the network. Disney Co. itself has been sued in those same cases (as are ABC, Inc. and Disney Enterprises). For example: “Life in a Glass House” case: "ABC’s parent company, The Walt Disney Co., is also named as a defendant to the copyright-infringement case, .." "American Broadcasting Companies, Disney Enterprises, ABC dba Disney/ABC Television Group, and ABC’s in-house production company, Keep Calm and Carry On Productions, are also named defendants."
You have not proven me wrong. It is tiresome, since you do not offer any proof and seeming retread the same info and finally actually indicate that you don't have proof. Well if I don't have a brain then you would consider no one to have a brain. One can infer base on what you have offer. It is possible that only insiders to ABC-Disney might know what the corporate name for the ABC TV network is and not by any research. Ranting on like any one on WP is going to stop you if you actual have proof and their is some great conspiracy. I have run into individual that block adding sourced information do that but no great conspiracy on WP against it. You want me ban because you don't have proof? I have been attempt to hunt down Walt Disney Studios' corporate form to no available, it might be considered Disney Enterprises, Inc. but other than it holds all pre-CC/ABC merger assets at that time and that it has all copyrights outside of Marvel, Lucasfilms, ABC and Pixar isn't enough to even say that Disney Enterprises owns Disney Studios. Spshu ( talk) 15:42, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
The documentation says its specifically for dates displayed within tables, yet you seem to insist on displaying all dates in articles, even if in body text, through it. ViperSnake151 Talk 06:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
I'm not sure if you saw my edit summary at List of Avengers members, but Secret Wars is not an alternate universe. It is the result of a convergence of all the Marvels universes, and the current status quo. Besides A-Force is scheduled to continue into All-New All-Different Marvel, the next phase of the MU after Secret Wars.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
You may also want to see this relevant discussion on Fortdj33's talk page.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello Spshu. I see that you recently undid my undo on Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, telling me to look in the talk page to see why you did so. However, the only mention of Disney Regional Entertainment I see on Talk:Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is at the top, where the template says that DRE's history was copied or moved into Parks and Resorts, citing an edit from 2011. However, that doesn't seem to be all that relevant to my reasoning to undo your initial edit. If you are talking about something else in the talk page, please provide a link to it. Thanks Elisfkc ( talk) 17:55, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that you reverted the changes in the Star Television Network article back to your latest version. The main reason why I made the edits in the first place is to improve the overall quality of the article (excessive bolding is frowned upon at Wikipedia), corrected a callsign (the Sarasota (actually Venice) affiliate was " WBSV-TV", not "WSBV-TV"), added stations that were affiliated with Star according to other articles (see KPXM-TV, KXLT-TV and WMNT-CD), and made a note that two of the stations signed on after the network folded (WBSV and WTTA). Reverting your article back to your version and discounting all the corrections is considered Wikipedia:Ownership of content, which is against Wikipedia rules. Also, if you are contesting any information, look it up and provide a source, don't just delete it wholesale. Thanks for your cooperation. -- azumanga ( talk) 22:42, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
What's the problem? Stop outright deleting articles without any discussion. ViperSnake151 Talk 02:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Katie talk 00:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Spshu ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Hey I did not even get a chance to respond at AfD. I was not disruptive I was being disrupted by Electricburst1996. Secondly, I requested attempt a discussion which he removed from the talk page. Previous history of blocks and edit warring are even suppose (as I understand it) to be use as that is the only way for the blocking administrator, KrakatoaKatie, to jump to your conclusion. Did you bother to note that a few block were done to me for an administrator's co-project mate (no reason given as his co-project was 3RR too), another was through gaming the system by a sock puppet with another disruptive editor and another because administrators refused to do a page protect to get the other editor to the discussion page (despite block notices stating "and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection." And most 3RR reports were frivolous. When looking have even bother to note that Electricburst1996 has reverted 4 times now with basic your permission. That is interest that Electricburst1996 does not bring up his block log and has 1 block in 2 years compared effective less constructive ones.
Electricburst1996 edits: 1. 22:45, 10 December 2015 Laff (TV network) (Undid revision 694690524 by Spshu (talk) Source or no source, no one but you has expressed any problem with this section.)
2. 23:20, 10 December 2015 Laff (TV network) (Reverted 1 edit by Spshu: Take it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television if you want to complain. None of the other subchannel network articles' programming lists have sources, either. (TW))
3. 23:25, 10 December 2015 Laff (TV network) (Reverted 2 edits by Spshu (talk). (TW))
Decline reason:
Whatever the problems with Electricburst1996's conduct, your unblock request is not the place to raise them. See WP:NOTTHEM. You seem to be unable to take responsibility for your actions on Wikipedia. You were once blocked "because administrators refused to do a page protect"? Seriously? Huon ( talk) 01:49, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hello, I just thought I would say again re FYI (U.S. TV channel) that not all blogs are unreliable sources, per WP:BLOGS and similar Wikipedia guidelines. I note that you reverted your own edit, reinstating the citation, so thank you. The website is widely used across Wikipedia and references in mainstream media also. If it bothers you that much, you're welcome to find your own citation from another source if you prefer. Thanks, -- Whats new? (talk) 01:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Spshu. Since ABC Family rebranded to Freeform on January 12, 2016, it is no longer owned by ABC Family Worldwide, Inc.. But Freeform will air on family-oriented series and feature films (including the Disney animated film), but will never air—such as the Marvel Productions libarary (which was now owned by Marvel Entertainment), the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers and Digimon franchise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.21.108.200 ( talk) 01:31, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
There is MAJOR clean-up necessary in the "Notable examples" section of the article:
<snip> - remove corrections wanted
I've tried changing the table myself recently, but a couple editors reverted my edits. So, maybe if you make the changes, there won't be the threat of a revert. 2602:304:CEBF:82F0:645A:700:3028:AE00 ( talk) 08:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Flint water crisis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- allthefoxes ( Talk) 20:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
question... If the table is sortable, then what is the difference? Just difference... - theWOLFchild 00:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted the Disney's Hollywood Hotel article. I was wondering how it was not notable, since it is every result I see on Google and it is a Disney hotel. Currently, it is the only Disney resort without an article. Elisfkc ( talk) 21:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to
United States federal executive departments: you may already know about them, but you might find
Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the
sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a
vandal when they've been previously warned.
Also, you may also want to consider archiving your talk page, as it's becoming quite lengthy and unwieldy. Please see
"Help: Talk page archiving". Thank you -
theWOLFchild 15:10, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
From IGN: "Legion centers on the story of David Haller, the alleged son of Professor X who was previously diagnosed with Schizophrenia before realizing his supposed illness was actually something more.
Landgraf said this potential series won't take place within the X-Men film universe." "It's not in the continuity of those films in the sense the current X-Men films take place in a universe in which everybody on planet Earth is aware of the existence of mutants," he said. "The series Legion takes place in a parallel universe, if you will, in which the US government is in the early days of being aware that something called mutants exist but the public is not. I wouldn't foresee characters moving back and forth because they really are parallel universes."
Since Legion is part of neither the MCU or X-Men film series, the current notation system in the article is appropriate. - Richiekim ( talk) 13:16, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Early today you twice removed an IMDB reference from The Inspectors (TV series), with reasons "is show" and " Wikipedia:Citing IMDb". I do not believe that either of these are good reasons to remove the reference. Wikipedia:Citing IMDB is an opinion essay, not policy or a guideline, and this use case is not even in its list of inappropriate uses. The show has premiered, so its cast list is static and not WP:CRYSTAL. I would appreciate if you would please undo your removal of the reference, or allow me to do so. Mamyles ( talk) 20:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeffrey Brohn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Brohn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat ( talk) 06:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Melvin P. McCree is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melvin P. McCree until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat ( talk) 06:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Apparently our resolved content dispute over Valiant Comics has boiled over to Pendant Productions.
I thoroughly followed the procedures laid out in WP:UNDUE and WP:PRIMARY in order to correct the issues you highlighted with Valiant Comics, and I replicated those procedures to fix the same issues you noted on Pendant Productions. And yet, your more recent edit summary states "(notability (no major media coverage), fix ibox formating, rmv. self sourcing info)."
Is the BBC not major media coverage??? Not to mention, most small, independent companies don't have wide press coverage. (Don't believe me, just take a look at the page for Earwolf, another podcasting company.} The ibox formatting follows Wikipedia:Infobox procedures to a tee. All of the self-sourced info was removed; and in compliance with WP:PRIMARY, Kickstarter does not constitute a primary source.
Then you stick a Wikipedia:Notability box at the top of the page, thoroughly ignoring the four sources established in the content you removed. And in the instances where more reliable sources were needed to replace primary or outdated sources, I added Citation Needed boxes to try and establish even MORE notoriety.
WP:DR provides the proper guidelines to handle this dispute. Wikipedia policy states don't delete salvageable text. For example, if an article appears biased, add balancing material or make the wording more neutral. Include citations for any material you add. You did none of this in your edits. Instead of following this procedure, you're throwing content to the wind and flagging a 9 year old Wiki entry for notability.
To say the least, I'm frustrated. But I want to do right and resolve this without filing a proper dispute. My request is that we compromise by reverting your last edit and adding Citation Needed notes where required to help other editors establish notoriety. If you just delete information on a whim, you'll never give editors a chance to correct the issue. -- Bmanpa ( talk) 23:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey man, I would appreciate it if you stop deleting the programming list for the page for Disney XD Australia and New Zealand. I've provided several sources for the list and all of the shows that are listed there are actually airing if you take a look at the schedule. I've put my time into making the list and I'm already getting mad because you wasted all of my time and efforts. So please stop doing this. If you want to talk about it more just PM me. But for now, can you at least keep the programming list on the DXD AUS/NZ page please?
Until then, good day to you sir!
Regarding this edit (and more particularly its summary), please see WP:INFOBOXREF. It's actually pretty common knowledge and an extension of WP:LEADCITE. I wouldn't characterize that as edit warring at all, as Afterwriting was making a substantially different edit each time, but also making a fix to meet INFOBOXREF at the same time. oknazevad ( talk) 16:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fifty State Initiative is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fifty State Initiative until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MSJapan ( talk) 03:16, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Toon_Disney
Please, I want a Toon Disney change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2F0E:70A3:BF00:16CC:20FF:FE12:405C ( talk) 20:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi. The article does not say that Boulder Media is a division of Hasbro Studios. In Variety says nothing about Hasbro Studios. Carefully read the article. "Cullen and his team will report to Hasbro’s (!) chief content officer, Stephen Davis". Davis is Hasbro’s chief content officer (and not only the President of Hasbro Studios). NightShadow ( talk) 15:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
It is in the official press release: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160713006391/en/Hasbro-Acquires-Boulder-Media-Animation-Studio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.235.106 ( talk) 22:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. – Darkwind ( talk) 01:12, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
@ Darkwind:, sorry, but I don't understand this block. You claimed that I reverted over 3 times at Hasbro Studios. 1) I did not. Please, actually check the history log. I made no edit between his third and forth edits. Even Electricburst1996 only reports 3 reversals And two, he was being disruptive over the source was not even editing out Hasbro Studios owning Boulder Media thus even his first reversal should cause him to be blocked. He even agreed that the Variety source was preferred over tformers.com which he continual placed back into Hasbro Studios (for Hasbro Studios ownership of Boulder Media). Yes, that is the extend of his edits until his fourth edit, which he used just me being reported at AN3 as reason to start up the content edit war at Hasbro Studios ( See WP:AN3#User:Spshu reported by User:Electricburst1996 (Result: )) which was not before; it was basically disruptive editing. With disruptive editing, it does matter who is right and who is wrong.
This was the text that he was reverting to: "On July 13, 2016, Hasbro Studios acquired Irish animation studio Boulder Media.[10]" tformers.com This was the text that I was returning (or some thing similar) to: "On July 13, 2016, Hasbro Studios acquired Irish animation studio Boulder Media. Boudler (sic) would continue operating separately under its current name under its chief content officer Stephen Davis." ref: Schwindt, Oriana (July 13, 2016). "Hasbro Acquires Dublin-Based Animation Studio Boulder Media". Variety. Retrieved July 14, 2016. (edit summary: "sorry but Variety is a better source & you are removing content for no reason")
He was being disruptive at Boulder Media remove other sourced information as I had sourced the whole article as it was self sourced or unsource and hatnoted as such. I warned him in the edit summary that he should not drag that into the argument over Hasbro Studios/Hasbro ownership of Boulder. ( do not remove other content & sourcing not related to Hasbro/Hasbro Studios issue). He was removing -1,218 characters (or bytes) that is more than 7 characters the length of "Studios".
I guess I should not revert any vandalism or distributive editing/editors as they may just reverse it? As Electroburst will see this as a green light to report me for reverting vandalism (since he has been more or less stalking me). I guess I have to pledge not to stop distributive editors and/or get them to see the errors of their ways.
Administrator @ Ymblanter: even pointed out to Nightshadow: "No, you are clearly wrong on this point. You made four reverts on the same page ( Hasbro Studios) today. Everybody can check the history. 4 > 1-2."
As far as my previous blocks, no administrator that has do so been able to adequately give reasons for the block, administrator refused to page protect articles or have been shown to have been duped. One by a pair of socks, the other by Electricburst1996 (see: User talk:Spshu#December_2015, User_talk:Spshu#ANI notification 2 & Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive908#Long-term edit warring and personal attacks by User:Spshu which turned in to a boomrang). Spshu ( talk) 15:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert."
— Wikipedia:Edit warring (emphasis in original)
@ JBnAZ: - sorry I can not respond on the talk page at this time.
Hello, Spshu/Archive 1 thank you for your recent contributions on articles related to amusement parks. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Amusement Parks, a WikiProject which aims to improve the quality of all amusement park related articles on Wikipedia. Feel free to stop by to learn more and sign up at the Participants page. Hope to see you over there! GoneIn60 ( talk) 13:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Spshu, you are hoaxing this page. Stop wasting our time or you will be blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.46.87 ( talk) 17:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC) NOt so see: Talk:Ready Player One (film)#Production_companies. Spshu ( talk) 17:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
I just got your deletion proposal for Marvel Super Hero Adventures: Frost Fight! If you want to have people debat it's deletion, might I suggest starting a n Arcles for Deletion discussion. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 20:43, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doc talk 08:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Defunct Scout and Scout-like organizations in the United States shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Frietjes ( talk) 13:53, 27 September 2016 (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. Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 18:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
You appear to be engaged in a edit war and WP:3RR applies. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 14:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, can I ask why you redirected the Hulk: Where Monsters Dwell article? You mentioned that it wasn't notable, but all films are notable enough to have their own articles as long as there's enough references. More reviews and other details about the film are now coming online so the article can be greatly improved if it goes back up. The Editor 155 ( talk) 23:37, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you chose to use the undo button when your change ultimately did not revert my change. Is there a specific reason you chose this action? - DinoSlider ( talk) 16:43, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding edit warring. The discussion is about the topic Coney Island hot dog. Thank you. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 17:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:27, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi. The cast members you removed from Hulk: Where Monsters Dwell had come from the credits of the film where they weren't listed on the source as the other ones. I'm just letting you know that. -- Rtkat3 ( talk) 16:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Proposed deletion notices can be removed by anyone. Once removed, they must not be restored. Spinning Spark 01:17, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Stop inserting non full articles in the template. Redirects and sections are useless in a template because the entire point of them is to connect stand-alone articles, not to tell the reader everything about the team/series/artist. If you want to add them back split them into separate articles. ★Trekker ( talk) 15:02, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heroes & Icons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charge!. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:48, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just want to say that I'm sorry for the conflict recently. I acted pretty immature and overreacted to a simple misunderstanding and I'm sorry for that. I've thought it over and I realize that I need to think over situations more before I react and that I'm too agressive many times. I haven't felt great recently in my life and I'm was not acting mature at all. I hope you understand that I sincerely regret how I acted. You were probably right for the most part and I lashed out due to having a bruised ego. I can't remember exactly everything that was said latest but I hope I didn't insult you or offend you. ★Trekker ( talk) 12:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate you changing the labels, but I'm not seeing that data in the displayed infobox. I'm not sure what the issue is. :( Naraht ( talk) 19:10, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Disney Channel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Northern Lights. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to ABC Daytime, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Digifan23 ( talk) 23:35, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited MGM Television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NBC Studios. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
This edit war over Animation studios owned by The Walt Disney Company has got to stop so I'm following Wikipedia guidelines by trying to reach a consensus with you. I'm letting you know that I kept most of your contributions, but placed them in parenthesis. I'm not sure placing "(primary production company)" is really necessary alongside Lilo & Stitch and Brother Bear since the Disney direct-to-video sequels that were produced solely in Australia and Canada don't need to have that on the article. However, you need to stop being sensitive when someone changes your writing and carrying on an nonconstructive nature. As others have suggested, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies and guidelines on the welcome page. We improve and revise upon each other's writing.
Again, I'm sorry I didn't recognize what you were trying to do, but I feel it's useful since most of the Feature Animation films were often produced in two or three countries. Christianster94 ( talk) 20:21, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
This message template was placed here by Yashovardhan Dhanania, a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. You recently filed a request or were a major party in the DRN case titled " Talk:Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer#Semi-protected edit request on_3_March_2017". The case is now closed: no relevant discussion found at article talk page. Please discuss at talk page before filing DRN. If you are unsatisfied with this outcome, you may refile the DRN request or open a thread on another noticeboard as appropriate. If you have any questions please feel free to contact this volunteer at his/ her talk page or at the DRN talk page. Thank you! -- Yashovardhan ( talk) 21:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cheddar (TV channel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Homebrew. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits to Spider-Man Strikes Back.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Total-Truth-Teller-24 ( talk) 22:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits to Spider-Man: The Dragon's Challenge.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Total-Truth-Teller-24 ( talk) 22:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
In the future, please be more careful with your warnings. In concerns to the AFD where we crossed paths, your warning was pretty off-base. Yes, editors are encouraged to comment on content, not editors, but they are free to comment on "editor's understanding of policy or Wikipedia on a whole", which is different. The warning you gave would be more appropriate for off topic complaining about, or attacking of, another editor. That is far from what I did. I was notifying you that you were misunderstanding and misrepresenting a WikiProject-level consensus, which is far from being " disruptive".
Also, probably probably read up on this as well. Its generally considered bad form to regurgitate template warnings to experienced editors. You...acknowledged I was an Admin at the end bit of your "warning", so it would seem you'd understand my experience level to some capacity.
Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
I left a few comments for you at Talk:Warner Bros. World Abu Dhabi. I'm just leaving this here to make sure you notice them. Bruzer Fox 14:02, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
You were right to revert my edit at Universal Pictures. "founders=" does work in the info box. I thought the change of "founder=" to "founders=" was just random vandalism. Thanks. John Nagle ( talk) 20:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
You asked for a citation for the name change. I added the source directly from the league itself and its reasoning. This is directly allowed by WP:PRIMARY as it is a straightforward statement with interpretation.What was on there before read like WP:OR without it. As for the league name, I couldn't care less (although the League's statement is "as of the 2017–18 season, we are know as the G-League", just because their website hasn't changed over has not changed that fact). In the end, you put citation needed, I gave a citation. Please stop your reverting. Yosemiter ( talk) 15:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Maybe instead of deleting or tagging unsourced statements, you should try actually finding a source. I am tired of finding them for your concerns and reverting things known to be true. Just because someone was lazy years ago when the article was edited does not give you an excuse to be as well. (The Asheville to Tulsa sources took me about one minute to find both a post from Ashville in 2005 and post from Tulsa about the 66ers history). And as to the name at the top, at least two other editors have named it G-League before me, I took that as a consensus to change. If you disagree, it is well beyond time to take it to the Talk page as you have hit your WP:3RR. Thank you, Yosemiter ( talk) 01:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Spshu ( talk) 15:48, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, like you did at WGN-TV, you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Now remember that. AdamDeanHall ( talk) 21:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Regarding [[Swartz Creek, Michigan], it basically means that you'd need full-fledged natural language processing to determine which is the correct one to update, as it's highly context-dependent (not so hard for a human but requires heavy machinery for a script).
Since there are only 2 years with populations specified (one of which doesn't show up on the Template:US Census Population anyway because it's not from a Census year), I'd really prefer to have the population numbers for those years listed in prose and have the lone historical population table be the one for Swartz Creek. Is this okay with you? If not, let me know why and what a better solution will be to this problem. DemocraticLuntz ( talk) 19:27, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I do not understand your adamancy to remove the clearly identified subsidiaries and divisions of DCPI? The article is about a company, said company has clear divisions and subsidiaries. You're withholding information for the infobox. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 20:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reversions you have made on One Magnificent Morning. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively,you may be blocked from editing. Dear; Spshu you are being really selfish on Wikipedia every time me and others edit HiT Entertainment it's saved and all of a sudden you come back and remove info from me and other users you should respect other people's opinions I'm NOT a bad user, You're a know it all and should learn important stuff plus anyone can edit Wikipedia plus you type things like, don't add anymore, or whatever else you should believe us and I'm sorry for typing this and you should accept our edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TTTEFan2017 ( talk • contribs
This is a conversation that I had with a moderator, and he elaborated on Marvel Comics different incarnations.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not making assumptions on your knowledge of Marvel Comics, quite the opposite actually. I wanted to get a clear understanding about what is regarded as the origins of Marvel Comics. I think the confusing comes from the fact that Atlas was renamed Marvel Comics and Magazine Management was renamed Marvel Comics Groups. I used the discussion with @ Tenebrae: as the basis for validating my edits, but hey, if that information is incorrect that I'm okay with it getting clarified. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 19:03, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
We apologize to modify the 1961–62 United States network television schedule (weekday) and 1962–63 United States network television schedule (weekday) pages. The CBS News program Calendar was actually aired at 7:00am, and local programming aired at 11:30am on the CBS lineup. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:2999:5568:F4E:F76F ( talk) 02:49, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
We are talking about the defunct syndication company "Weiss Global Enterprises", which distributed movies as well as The Danny Thomas Show. The assets were to sold to SFM in the mid 1990s. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A9DF:3418:D59D:A504 ( talk) 03:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
So we meet again for the wrong reason. Please DO NOT delete factual info. I added the citation you said was missing. The proper thing to do is to add a 'citation needed' tag regarding edits which are true, but uncited. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 20:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
This is ridiculous. You're not taking TV Guide and Zap2It, but you're accepting some random database TV Tango which says on top that it references IMDB.com and TV.com which are unreliable sources, and has a tab to Zap2It? The show exists and it is airing on Disney XD and has sources to back it up. If you need to wait for Disney XD to verify their DXPOfficial Twitter account, then fine, I have provided sources for TV Guide and Zap2It. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 21:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
They're not in the same line of business as Timely Comics, and they both have different parent companies. Just because two companies have a similar name doesn't mean that they should be in the same article. The not to be confused with link exists for a reason. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 12:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Spshu, you stopped being collaborative when you intentionally removed my response to you. And by the way, I can report you for edit warring with my edits, this is a two way street and not a one way service. Fact of the matter is, making a list with two unaffiliated business just doesn't makes sense, it's not like Animation studios owned by The Walt Disney Company or Timely Comics in which all the entities mentioned in the article are in the same line of business, it's just two companies who have the name Marvel Music. Their association with Marvel with both companies is entirely different. There is no validation to merge them. What I'm noticing here is that you're adamant for an article to be filled to the brim with citations, otherwise it's not valid in your eyes. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 18:43, 26 July 2017 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: ). Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 19:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to KXTV, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 23:56, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
My edits of KXTV were indeed constructive, unlike your edits, which are hard to read. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:09, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
You just reverted this change I made to Great Officer of State. Can you explain the rationale? There are no other instances that I am aware of where a citation to a standard reference work (such as EB1911, EB9, CathEnc) includes the access date, because the text will never change. The only point, I believe, of an access date is to defend against a citation that could change, and sources like these will never change other than to correct typos in the online rendition etc. It's redundant and noisy.
Your reversion also removed the list of secondary sources cited by the encyclopedia (it's standard practice to include these for anyone who wants to dig deeper), the volume/page (again, standard practice for EB1911 and friends), at least one footnote that is not relevant to the tagged text, and a "wstitle" that points to an article that isn't in wikisource (Treasury), thus introducing a link error. So while I would certainly prefer to lose the accessdates, these other items (and some wording improvements) certainly should stay.
@ PBS:, would you care to opine? David Brooks ( talk) 23:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
{{
EB1911}}
, {{
DNB}}
, etc do not need access dates for the reason DB has given, see the conversation at
template talk:London Gazette#deprecated parameters for a recent comment on this by yet another editor.{{
EB1911}}
Your experience with you pushing your style isn't relevant, DB. You claim that volume/page is "desirable", but reject access dates, but "desirable" doesn't make required. You never seen an access date when that standard in the cite templates. Access date is an allowed field of EB1911.
Casual readers are going to care most likely about any additional sourcing. Listing these sources imply that EB1911 is not a reliable source.
Re the Treasury article, I have been aware contrary to Public Broadcasting System's and your assumption the difference between wstitle and url. Perhaps I prefer to link to WikiSource regardless, as perhaps I intended to get the article up there. It is like adding a red link knowing that at some point such an article would be created. Instead, you divert it else where. I had use lovetoknow or some other EB1911 site to link to, only to have it remove EB1911 or shut down. Treasury article is now up at wikisource. So in effect, you have made that edit for little to no reason. (Except that it save me some time in finding the page at archive.org.) Spshu ( talk) 21:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
{{
One source}}
.{{
EB1911}}
or {{
cite EB1911}}
templates, because it will give false positives to the maintenance categories under
Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating a citation from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, and so an editor deliberately adding links via the parameter wstitle to EB1911 articles on Wikisource that do not exist, and who is aware of the maintenance templates (and that other editors use them for maintenance), will be seen as disruptive. --
PBS (
talk) 15:41, 12 August 2017 (UTC)You wrote on my talk page:
My initials. It is only misleading if you are an American! In the UK the Public Broadcasting service is called the BBC, In Australia ABC, in Canada CBC and New Zealand TVNZ. -- PBS ( talk) 12:50, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
BTW this talk page is way too big. You should consider setting up an auto-archive see help:archive#Automated archival for how to do that. -- PBS ( talk) 12:52, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Read two magazine issues "Viacom World Wide" and list every title Viacom distributed by the point, including ones not distributed by Viacom and ones already distributed by Viacom.
Source this: [35] [36] -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:4911:2003:5D8D:EDC2 ( talk) 03:42, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Marvel Music now re-directs to a sub-section of Marvel Studios. Now you can bespoke the article to your whimsy to meet notability. You can take this opportunity to sample anything from Music of the Marvel Cinematic Universe that will be relevant to Marvel Music Inc. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 23:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The use of "channel" and "network" is seriously quite confusing, but a simple guideline is to see if the brand in question has both a broadcast and a web streaming presence. For example, 'fyi' has both a live broadcast sent over cable, dish, etc. and operates a streaming service. Streaming is another "channel" of content. Multiple channels mean it is a network (of channels). -- Netoholic @ 21:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
On 19 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Marvel Music (imprint), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Marvel Comics briefly operated an imprint dedicated to comics about musicians? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Marvel Music (imprint). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Marvel Music (imprint)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:32, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The Thomas-Spelling Productions page has just been created by an anoymous user that used visual edits to build the page. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A425:35B2:7345:5CD2 ( talk) 01:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
The origins of Spelling Television began in 1966 as Thomas-Spelling Productions got formed. In 1972, much of the staff held by Aaron Spelling Productions moved over to the newly-established Spelling-Goldberg Productions, and its first project was The Rookies. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A425:35B2:7345:5CD2 ( talk) 01:51, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
I need background help for Spelling-Goldberg Productions.
The origins traced to May 1, 1972, when Leonard Goldberg, Screen Gems' top TV executive left the studio to partner with Aaron Spelling, forming out Spelling-Goldberg Productions along with its staff from the Aaron Spelling Productions company. Not only producing The Rookies, he also produced made for TV movies. It was involved in a lawsuit with Worldvision Enterprises, the first distributor for The Rookies before Viacom took over in 1976. SGP signed a deal with Metromedia in 1973. In 1974, an attempt of a sitcom called The Fireman's Ball was made, but it was intially rejected when the FCC delayed the 22-hour program schedule to 1975, but the second pilot however aired in the May of 1975 as Where's the Fire? ABC however managed to dub it as "Aaron's Broadcasting Company", like with Aaron's other company Aaron Spelling Productions. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A425:35B2:7345:5CD2 ( talk) 02:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
I add others besides TV shows to the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page! -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:C8EE:3A36:CB9C:11C ( talk) 02:37, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
I hope the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page might redirect to Spelling Television or not redirected. The rights to their library produced by Aaron Spelling was split into two different companies:
The Spelling-Goldberg Productions page was edited by anoymous users to add Chopper One plus anything besides TV shows and a few modifications. If its not notable, then it might redirect to the Spelling Television page, due to amid controversy regarding anoymous users' modifications. The ownership to Spelling Television's library belongs to two different companies ( CBS Television Distribution for most of Spelling's production output, Sony Pictures Television for the whole entire catalog produced by Aaron Spelling and Leonard Goldberg through Spelling-Goldberg Productions). -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:6CB3:A284:F4A1:D3B3 ( talk) 21:10, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
The Spelling-Goldberg Productions page was modified by an anoymous user to replace "defunct" with "out of business".
It makes even worse, make it not notable and forced to redirect to the Spelling Television page, and the ownership of its library was split into two different companies ( CBS Television Distribution for the Thomas-Spelling, and Spelling Television libraries, and Sony Pictures Television for the Spelling-Goldberg library) -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:31FC:8CE9:84D9:2121 ( talk) 23:38, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
I agree to redirect the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page into the Spelling Television page, because this is not notable. An anoymous user said Spelling's production company has its origins in 1965. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:8942:365C:6947:65D8 ( talk) 02:30, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The Spelling-Goldberg Productions page has been edited by anoymous users, starting at August 22, 2017 with the addition of Chopper One. An anoymous user says Spelling Television was formed in 1965, not 1969. Spshu agreed that they will redirect the Spelling-Goldberg Productions page, because this was not notable and modified the Spelling Television page. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:51CD:52DC:F6AC:D56D ( talk) 11:28, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Spshu, the original distributor of The Bill Dana Show that should've been corrected is Weiss Global Enterprises. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:C18B:8A8A:EBDC:8CB1 ( talk) 02:31, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
DID we not have this conversation last month in the United Artists talk page? Did we not?? Instead of you always starting edit wars with most users, read and understand these sources properly! Did you bother reading those sources I've put on that talk page and did you find anymore sources that I've put?? King Shadeed 15:18, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
No, King Shadeed. SGP was actually sold to Columbia in 1982, which means the page does not redirect to Spelling Television. Also, Spshu replace the simple Broadcasting Magazine magazines with a more visual one. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:A004:2744:5EEB:9592 ( talk) 00:43, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
For a list of Sony Pictures Television shows, I Dream of Jeannie and Nancy were both co-produced by Sidney Sheldon Productions. And for The Monkees, it was co-produced by Raybert Productions. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:CCD6:DAB0:1BBC:4F4A ( talk) 03:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Talk:Marvel_Toys
We're currently having a discussion about Marvel Toys being renamed back to Toy Biz as Toy Biz was the common name for the dissolved business. Please leave your thoughts about this name change towards this discussion. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 09:54, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Spashu, You keep rolling back changes on me and I do not understand what you are referring to by "stop rearranging or rmv. fields in the ibox - it does not effect display, but". I have been editing with the visual editor. I would like to know what is being screwed up as to not continuously have changes rolled back and make sure I am not breaking things. Please be aware of your audience that we are not all experts on Wikipedia but know the subjects that we are updating. Dan roman ( talk) 18:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi Spshu - thanks for the information you sent me regarding the updates I had made to the AerisWeather page. However, I do believe some updates will need to be made to accurately reflect the page. I went in and tried to update the company to Praedictix, but then I realized I am not able to update the title of the page. Are you able to do so as the description of the page is a better reflection of the company history for Praedictix. Here's a brief history for your sake:
MediaLogic sold all HamWeather assets including the AerisWeather brand over a year ago which those assets continue to operate under. All MediaLogic remaining assets were rebranded to Praedictix who continue to provide broadcast weather videos, consulting and forensic services.
In conclusion, AerisWeather is no longer in the Media business and is a global weather data and imagery provider only. I am an active AerisWeather employee and we are trying to ensure the information we have online regarding our company is accurate. If you need to confirm on your end, please feel free to hit us up via support: https://www.aerisweather.com/contact/
Bclark0622 ( talk) 17:42, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Hopefully you can assist in updating the AerisWeather page to Praedictix
MediaLogic sold all HamWeather assets including the AerisWeather brand over a year ago which those assets continue to operate under. All MediaLogic remaining assets were rebranded to Praedictix who continue to provide broadcast weather videos, consulting and forensic services. Two separate companies with distinctly different charters. We are not avid Wikipedia users so your assistance is appreciated. Both companies happen to be based in Eden Prairie, MN.
Rebrand to Praedictix https://mblsportal.sos.state.mn.us/Business/SearchDetails?filingGuid=e8eba010-18c2-e611-8167-00155d46d26e
Best 184.105.35.130 ( talk) 18:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello there,
Thank you for reaching out to me. I would like to resolve this as AerisWeather is a great tool that I'm using for a project and want to correct and update the article to share some of the features/applications powered by it as a long time lurker and now more active Wikipediaite - perhaps the solution is the rename the page to its current described company name - seems to be Praedictix. Is there a way to fork pages that you can recommend? More confusing than a blank page is one that is wholly inaccurate.
I would like that, Barnaby Jones was formerly distributed by Columbia Pictures Television, as evidenced by this source "Broadcasting, June 13, 1977, pg. 50". But King Shadeed agreed in the " List of CBS Television Studios programs#QM Productions" section. King Shadeed also agreed, as evidence by the same source that The San Pedro Beach Bums was originally distributed by Metromedia Producers Corporation. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:81E7:7D05:B95B:11D0 ( talk) 02:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Around the mid 1970s, Time-Life Television got the rights to the pre-1973 Spelling-Goldberg Productions library. [1] [2]
King Shadeed, what owns the rights to the TV movies (The Daughters of Joshua Cabe, No Place to Run, Say Goodbye, Maggie Cole, The Bounty Man, Home for the Holidays, The Great American Beauty Contest and The Bait) now? It is Sony Pictures Television (the owners of the Spelling-Goldberg library), HBO Enterprises (the owners of the Time-Life library), CBS Television Studios (the owners of the pre-1973 ABC catalog) or Disney-ABC Domestic Television (the owners of the ABC Circle Films catalog and the copyright to these TV movies)? -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:359B:FDC1:80C1:F23E ( talk) 02:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Dear Spshu I'm sorry for what I said about you because of edits for what I made because HIT Entertainment is a company which is 90% British 10% American and can you forgive me Wikipedia is legal to edit free for everyone to use and anyone can create their own articles. And one more question for you What does your name stand for?
Dear; Spshu what are reliable sources?
King Shadeed, add important notice to the Spelling Television page!
A company ran by Douglas S. Cramer (who partnered with Spelling as executive producer for shows and TV movie projects between 1977 and 1991, and also acts as executive vice president at the time), The Douglas S. Cramer Company co-existed at the same time, producing Wonder Woman, and TV movies like Dawn Potrait of a Teenage Runaway, but these series are not part of the modern day library now owned by CBS. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:9507:6743:3D0E:8B38 ( talk) 03:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
King Shadeed, I will going to edit the Spelling Television page to replace simple reference links with more advanced reference links derived from sources. -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:2989:35B6:E3FC:ACBF ( talk) 02:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
"The Spelling logo continues to appear on the covers of DVD releases of the Spelling library except for those shows owned outright by Sony Pictures Television, the shows produced by Danny Thomas and Aaron Spelling, like The Mod Squad and The Guns of Will Sonnett and shows that were not originally produced by Spelling although eventually later acquired, such as Bonanza and the Quinn Martin shows." -- 2601:C8:C001:9AF0:1C82:E885:7ABE:1B18 ( talk) 04:05, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Disney International HD in India is being marketed as a general entertainment channel by Disney India. Even though it has Disney Channel original shows the strategy in India is different and is completely separate from Disney Channel India. So it should have its own page. User 261115 ( talk) 18:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Some of the cites were missing author names, pointing to the wrong urls and/or missing dates when articles were published. 86.152.12.237 ( talk) 16:55, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
This article was redirected after a lengthy effort at consensus at Talk:Marvel Music, as I mentioned in my edit summary. Is there some reason you ignored that and restored it again anyway? Argento Surfer ( talk) 16:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Dear; Spshu you thought I was going to send you a complaint alert to you but I'm not because another user edited HiT Entertainment and I didn't make bad edits and I edited that page but please don't think that I made bad edits and I saw you say that I'm not a good user but your wrong and I'm sorry for saying it over and over but I want you to know that I have a user who is a good user like everyone and myself and it is Trivialist and remember to know because that user sends me letters and send letters back and I hope and the user doesn't think that I'm a bad user but you do and say but won't you apologize and if you want to check out the user's page click the link in the description below. PLEASE SEND ME A THANK YOU LETTER AND THANK TRIVIALIST TOO AND FORGIVE ME AND REMEMBER WHAT I TYPED.
Trivialist TTTEFan2017 ( talk) 04:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
I have a quick favour to ask you, would you be able to fix the feature film table of New World Pictures? The formatting's all weird and inconsistent. Cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 21:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Happy Holidays Spshu, I just wanted to say would you like to send a message back to me and I'm going to edit HIT Entertainment so thank me because and don't think I made bad edits and think I'm a bad user send me a thank you letter and say I'm sorry I was wrong for saying don't add or change edits TTTEFan2017 can you forgive me say that on your message back to me please do not ignore my message. TTTEFan2017 ( talk) 23:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I saw your edit on HiT Entertainment and your right, I was wrong to say do not remove to you send me a message that says Happy Holidays. TTTEFan2017 ( talk) 23:03, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Marvel Entertainment. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. XXzoonamiXX ( talk) 20:33, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu.
You are invited to join
WikiProject Food and drink, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of
food,
drink and
cuisine topics. |
)
Please (a) stop edit warring at major film studio and (b) stop doing so in such a way that you are deleting good content. I have explained why A24 belongs; you have deleted it without explanation. As for Gaumont and Amblin, we can take that up on the article's Talk page. — DCGeist ( talk) 22:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, what's it going to be? Are you going to restore A24, or shall I? — DCGeist ( talk) 22:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Next time you try to proceed as you have here, I will most certainly report you. — DCGeist ( talk) 22:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Disney International HD. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You behave this way and force your edits upon others no matter what. Judging by your talk page it's a common thing you do. User 261115 ( talk) 02:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Disney International HD. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. User 261115 ( talk) 03:06, 12 January 2018 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:User 261115 (Result: ). Thank you. User 261115 ( talk) 03:22, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! User 261115 ( talk) 15:49, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I see you have a history of edit warring on this and other pages. Such behavior is unacceptable. In the present case, multiple editors have now explained to you that your preferred version is unsourced. If you proceed to edit war over this matter, you will be blocked. Time to move on. DocKino ( talk) 18:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Dear; Spshu more you may know me as TTTEFan2017. But I decided to change my name to TTTE&StarWarsFan2018. Remember when you said do not add remove or change content to me. Wikipedia is a place to read or to edit, but what you said to me was mean. I felt like you were trying to ban me from editing it was just an edit, DO NOT TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY LIKE YOU DID LAST YEAR I am trying to provide good faith and Trivialist realizes that I can be thanked for editing. WARNING! SO DO NOT TYPE ANYTHING BAD ABOUT ME OR TELL ME TO STOP EDITING. IF YOU DO I WILL BE DISAPPOINTED! APOLIGIZE TO ME ON MY TALK PAGE AND DO NOT SAY PLEASE DO NOT TAKE EDITS TO SERIOUSLY, AND I'M SORRY FOR MY TONE AND I HAD TO TYPE THIS. As for HiT Entertainment the article that you I and others edit will get semi-protected for whatever long. So I'm going to thank you on the last edit you made and the line you said was good faith and it said: that is so you don't have to manual change "years ago". and Trivialist would probably thank you too. That concludes was my backstory. Have any suggestions my talk page is always here you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TTTE&StarWarsFan2018 ( talk • contribs) 20:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted your redirect. Firstly the first incarnation the WWF owned 50% and NBC owned 50%. Neither the WWFE or NBC is associated with this so the owners are not the same. WWF went public in 1999, so Vince McMahon's indirect ownership in the league was drastically below 50%. Your comments on similar owners is just plain wrong. Second, if you watch the press conference Vince made it very clear that this is not the old XFL. He considered using a different name but just liked the name XFL which is why he used it, but made it very clear it is not the original league. - Galatz Talk 23:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Larry Levinson Productions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Murder 101 ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Please stop making disruptive edits to Super RTL.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. -- 2607:FCC8:6250:0:183C:6845:EAC5:2655 ( talk) 00:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Spshu_reported_by_User:2607:FCC8:6250:0:643B:F6DF:E239:88C2_(Result:_No_violation) -- NeilN talk to me 19:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for finding information on Fourth Class Cities. I didn't know they even existed. Criticalthinker ( talk) 02:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC) |
Excellent find! I had no idea about Fourth Class Cities, and I have a particular interest in local governments, especially here in Michigan where I live. What I would like to nail down is exactly how many cities still hold this status. The article you sourced seems to save four or five, but only gives an example of Yale and Sandusky. I'm also interested in some other information I think you've added. What is the difference between regular charter and special charter, and which predominate? The wiki article seems to say that most cities were transformed into special charters, so I assume that means that original charters are those very early cities (i.e. Detroit)? -- Criticalthinker ( talk) 03:02, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, would you be able to check the formatting and wording of UTV Software Communications article. They're the media conglomerate wholly owned by The Walt Disney Company India. The biggest issue with the article is the severe lack of citations and the weird wording that various editors have edited this article. This is a really interesting company and it's a shame that the poor article formatting is damaging this article's credibility. Would you be able to take the time to evaluate it and make the necessary edits please? cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 21:10, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
WLNS-TV. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 01:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Please follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle on United States Air Force. The information is well sourced, and I would strongly reccomend discussing it on the talk page rather than blanking. Garuda28 ( talk) 13:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Spshu? Read this: "Do not link to search pages for Wikipedia citations. These pages are not static and change often." All of that links to the search pages. They want us to use this: "On the list of search results the Issue Date "1951-01-17-BC-OCR-Page-0012" is the link to an issue containing your search terms ub YYYY-MM-DD and page order. Click on any link to view the actual page". I don't know how often David and his admin staff check how often we use their content, but they gave us that format for us users to use. That ends the confusion so that Wikipedia doesn't get into trouble. So why did you change that in the first place? King Shadeed March 26, 2018 11:40 EDT.
Quick favour, regarding the comments of the edits that you do, you're notes are excessively abbreviated. Said abbreviations can be difficult for some editors to understand. Is it okay if you use full names as opposed to condensed names (unless said article/entity is officially recognized under the condensed name)? not only will it make your edits more clearer, but there's a high enough word count for full sentences now. cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 15:22, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Why do you have to ruin a good article with your style of formatting. I know the DTV transition is in the past, so I left it were it was. I reverted your other edits though. It made the article hard to read. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:16, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney Direct-to-Consumer and International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rebecca Campbell ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:25, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Same goes for you. User 261115 ( talk) 20:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Bankster ( talk) 22:27, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Flint water crisis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 BRD 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. TomCat4680 ( talk) 15:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
I noticed this at Pontiac, Michigan. The edit summary does not give an adequate reason why the content was removed. I'd like to restore this...
Thanks WhisperToMe ( talk) 13:05, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Disney International HD. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Plus you ignore what I say to you on the talk page. User 261115 ( talk) 19:18, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Disney International HD, you may be blocked from editing. User 261115 ( talk) 14:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andromeda (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mutant X ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Disney International HD shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. User 261115 ( talk) 16:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jim Ananich, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Cherry ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hey there, you don't mind contributing to Talk:Disney–ABC Television Group regarding the merge of Capital Cities/ABC Inc.? It's an outdated discussion and it won't be closed unless there's more than one person who makes a joint decision. Thank you. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 15:30, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marvel Anime, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madhouse ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Thought you might find this link useful. - theWOLFchild 01:08, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marvel Entertainment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Etihad Stadium ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
@ Spshu: Do you know of the connections between Flint Automobile and Little Motor Car Company and Flint Wagon Works? I see Alexander Brownell Cullen Hardy and Durant were tied up with both of them. Is Flint Wagon Works and Flint Automobile one and the same? I thought I might try to harmonise the two articles. Regards, Eddaido ( talk) 23:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bleecker Street (company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Variety ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:12, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Listen Spshu, your edits are nonsense according to me. CLT-UFA merged with Pearson's television division to form the RTL Group, and Buena Vista International Television Investments doesn't exist. Please stop reverting the Super RTL article with lies, otherwise you'll be permabanned from this site.
Westj1211 ( talk) 01:07, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
←There you go, since you just want to try to rub it in my nose so bad. Just because you project your own faults on me. Instead it will remain as a monument of your poor boorish behavior. -- Westj1211 ( talk) 01:05, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
You have participated at List of breakfast drinks Therefore, you might be interested in the deletion nomination of the article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of breakfast drinks (2nd nomination) -- Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 16:07, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm archiving your talk page because it was getting too long. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 17:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adventure Island ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
I think the list should be limited to physical assets and businesses. So the Las Vegas Bowl event shouldn't be included, but if, say, there was a Las Vegas Bowl LLC subsidiary of ESPN Events, that could be listed. Trivialist ( talk) 21:17, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Spshu, once I become an administrator, I will see the IP address and ISP, then block you permanently from all Wikimedia sites, because you don't care about the Super RTL article, only the Broadband TV News article on Super RTL. I WILL ban you for your poor grammar, and irrelevant information from an irrelvant website. DO NOT REVERT THE SUPER RTL ARTICLE. IF YOU DO, I WILL BAN YOU. But in order to ban you, I have to achieve 10,000 edits for this. -- Westj1211 ( talk) 20:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello! I understand that you deleted the information about Luna Petunia (fifth season) and Treehouse Detectives as (future) Hasbro productions in the "Filmography" section of Hasbro Studios and I admit that I should not add that. I should investigate more and I'm sorry. After writing everything, I realized that the credits of both series did not include the Hasbro logo.
But I think it was unnecessary for you to eliminate everything added about what happened with those series at the time of the acquisition, in the "History" section. In that section it is mentioned that "at the time" of the acquisition, PRBM was in pre-production, but it is also worth noting what happened with the other series.
It would be nice if you could write about the PRSNS hiatus and the premieres of the fifth season of Luna Petunia and the new series Treehouse Detectives, with your own words in a more professional way, since they are Saban productions that were produced before the acquisition and that were released after it became official, those series are now owned by Hasbro and are part of the history of the acquisition as well.
Again, I am very sorry if it causes any discomfort.
I'll wait for an answer, bye!
-- Angel135 ( talk) 03:01, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney's Fairy Tale Weddings & Honeymoons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Father of the Bride ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:04, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Spshu, did you mean to undo your own edit at Disney streaming service? Your edit summary makes me think that this may have been a goof. Thanks, and have a good day, Gilded Snail ( talk) 14:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Tell me something. Is Amblin Partners listed here as a studio?
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WLNS-TV. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Global Road Entertainment. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's
talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an
appropriate noticeboard or seek
dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to
request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be
blocked from editing.
You've been reverting a lot of edits on the founding date
Beasting123 (
talk) 21:49, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Beasting123. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Beasting123 that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I gave you a warning, as you have reverted that page 3 times recently. You responded with this: "Do not aid disruptive IP editors nor falsely attack some for removing unexplained and distruptive edits". I do not believe it was disruptive at all. You have edited that article multiple times reverting the same information, and your talk page shows you have a history of it. Beasting123 ( talk) 21:56, 31 August 2018 (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. Beasting123 ( talk) 03:32, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm ever so sorry. You are indeed correct! Marvel did have involvement in the show. I was only remembering the end of the credits where the logos appear and only Sunbow's was shown and NOT Marvel's But regardless they were in the main set of credits and yes I should have looked at them prior, you made the right call to revert everything to normal. Once again, my bad. Blame failing memory of mine and the sheer incompetence of Sunbow for not including Marvel's logo at the end. D31 ( talk) 01:03, 6 September 2018 (UTC)David31584 D31 ( talk) 01:03, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not a new user. Hence, it is wrong for you to send me templates of vandalism edits where it is clearly not. Please argue the next time you revert me on Super RTL, which is barely understandable and seems to be raw-translated from German, thanks. -- Bankster ( talk) 23:22, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Spshu, might I kindly suggest that you look into setting up archiving on your Talk page? The size of this page (732 MB+ and 12+ years worth of messages) is really kind of ridiculous, and it makes it somewhat difficult for other editors to review and/or post new messages for you. (Perhaps even somewhat difficult for you.) Just a suggestion. General Ization Talk 00:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
I've started a discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard. Let's wait for some other editors to weigh in before we continue any further. -- 68.32.218.140 ( talk) 21:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited HBO Films, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Picturehouse ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Freaky Friday (2018 film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
And don't make WP:POINT-y edits with maintenance tags. Thank you. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 14:23, 25 October 2018 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:Amaury (Result: ). Thank you. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 14:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 00:48, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Esuka323:, you are missing the point about the canvassing that was part of showing that Amaury was disruptive and spoiling for an edit war in canvassing thus reverting him was legitimate (and should not count towards 3rr). Since I did not agree with him Amaury thus ended discussion (so much for BRD being "policy" - it is not - "This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community." "The BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (BRD) is an optional method of reaching consensus. This process is not mandated by Wikipedia policy, but it can be useful for identifying objections, keeping discussion moving forward and helping to break deadlocks." I still started the discussion not Amuary) and ran off to 3RR because he did not "win", while I continued discussion with him. Amaury met 5 out of 6 signs of begin disruptive (the one sign not met conflicts with another - it is over use of requesting citation needed). Since, he was being disruptive my reverts of him should not be counted. He directly interprets PRIMARY to allow himself to violate WP:V. Therefor the canvassing argument was to undermine Amaury's status as disruptive in this matter and coloring my previous interactions with IJBall and Amaury which was benign as confrontational. So, to say that focusing on canvassing like that was the only issue and you acting like it is too may have under minded the whole disruptive nature of the two of them. I am not the one pretending I did not do anything wrong IJBall feels that he his above reproach loaded with a personal attack "(Undid revision 865550130 by Spshu (talk) - Remove nonsense from an editor with a serious problem...)" in reverting notification of edit warring and IJBall removing notices to Amuary (Remove nonsense - DTtR...)" in reverting a host of notification about his behavior and and yes why I did not follow DTtR. They don't seem to believe there are issue with themselves. And if I just throw myself on the mercy of the administrator that makes it easy for the administrator not to see the bigger view and just punish me, when it "takes two to tango" (edit war).
@ EdJohnston:, where are the blocks for Amuary and IJBall - fair is fair. I clearly show Amuary as disruptive and the records show that IJBall also exceeded the 3RR mark and should have been easy to pick up on with out me telling you as it "takes two to tango". Since you did not, here they are:
hi,
Both are separate companies, and not the same. Hayholt ( talk) 17:28, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Howard T. Owens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Meredith Corporation, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages ABC and A&E ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:20, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey there Spshu. Would you be able to clarify whether Marvel Games was previously known as Marvel Interactive? Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 00:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I have reverted an edit of yours on this article, and would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
~ ToBeFree ( talk) 20:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC) |
Spshu, I was very close to blocking you after reviewing your recent edit history. You have gone well beyond WP:3RR on multiple pages: the only reason I'm not doing so is because it's been over 8 hours since your last revert. If you continue to approach a content dispute in this manner, you are looking at an extended block, possibly without any warning. Your block log is long, and it won't be long before someone blocks you indefinitely: I don't think you want that. Just please stop after being reverted, and try to reach a consensus on the relevant talk page. Vanamonde ( talk) 03:57, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited NBCUniversal Cable Entertainment Group, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Buzz and Snap ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:40, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WKRC-TV; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:24, 17 January 2019 (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. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:45, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Please do not edit page Marvel HQ or strict action would be taken against you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Social XD ( talk • contribs) 16:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Alpha Flight Special vol2 No1.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) 18:25, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
The file File:Stirr logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Willy1018 (
talk) 06:26, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Can you please get your facts right about United Artists Releasing and United Artists Digital Studios? UA Releasing IS UA Corporation, it's a resurrection of UA as its original self, a film distribution company, and UA Digital Studios is just a SEPARATE company that only uses the name. So UA Releasing is the PERMANENT successor, not UA Digital Studios, which is only a quiet revival of the name. If I'm trying to show you proof here, you need to look at this page. 88.84.156.101 ( talk) 19:16, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
FYI, nothing ever said that Fox Entertainment Group ceased to exist. Therefore, we are listing it as a Disney subsidiary. Good day. HurricaneGeek2002 ( talk) 20:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Now that you’ve listed a source that states that FOX EG is dead, this no longer applies. HurricaneGeek2002 ( talk) 20:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on A Cinderella Story (film series); that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 19:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
You have over 300 discussions on your talk page. Would you consider archiving your talk page and just limiting it to the last 12 months' worth of discussions? It's hard and unwieldy to navigate such a large talk page. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, To prevent an edit war, Please take to AfD or the article talk page if contest it's notability.
Thanks, RhinosF1 (chat) (status) (contribs) 19:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
jump off😡 Esaïe Prickett ( talk) 03:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:King Crimson the Third (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. EdJohnston ( talk) 21:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox 2000 Pictures, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Division and Brad Simpson ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
You didn't have to revert the whole thing, just put that section back. You're just like BlueboyLI. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:45, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Where are your claims that Blue and Dolphin Reef are different movies? You're just making the page more confusing that it already was. Luigitehplumber ( talk) 12:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
So I left a message in regards to my edits via Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Edit-warring at Template:Film Studio.-- King Crimson the Third ( talk) 19:32, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Okay, this is getting out of hand here. We asked you time and time via Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film again to stop reverting my edits via the Major film studio article. What you may be doing considering your childish behavior may be considered editing and/or reverting war and you will be blocked just for that.-- King Crimson the Third ( talk) 23:56, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Preach. Nice to see I’m not the only one who’s called him out on this behavior. You constantly think you’re always right in a “never my fault” kinda way. HurricaneGeek2002 ( talk) 02:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Prospect Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Captain Blood ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
In regards to your recent revert on the 20th Century Fox Animation page, was it necessary? Because when I edit that page; as well as major film studio; you just revert my edits and allegedly used them as unsourced. This confuses me. I used all my sources and wording, and at the same time fixed the errors; but yet you revert my edits. I'm curious, have you tried looking at the original edits before reverting?-- King Crimson the Third ( talk) 22:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Evidence for this statement
TCFHE page states “a wholly-owned subsidiary of Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment.”
It is listed on the table on the DTCI page as a transfer from 21CF
It is also listed on
List of assets owned by The Walt Disney Company and
template:Disney
Think about these things before changing it back. And also admit your wrongdoing while you comment on this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.54.163.113 ( talk) 17:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Davison, Michigan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tim Thomas ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox Networks Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Setanta ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:09, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox Networks Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Meo ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 14:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fox Networks Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RCN ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 17:10, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Are there any sources that Turner Program Services renaming it into Telepictures Distribution in 1996 when the Turner-Time Warner merger completed. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:1827:DE69:13D1:2B4 ( talk) 05:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Look at the source: "telepictures%20distribution" here. But looks like it was actually formed in 1995, not 1996 when Turner Program Services merged with Telepictures to create Telepictures Distribution. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:6CF9:18A4:6D33:A6F0 ( talk) 14:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited HBO Max, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mystery ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Why'd you have to revert the whole thing? Just correct the items in question. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 13:37, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney Theatrical Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Devil Wears Prada ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 08:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
You've reverted an editor ( CCVolk23zx ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) on some media articles. Please invite them to a discussion on any article talk page which you have taken issue with them previously. Also, if you have info that demonstrates trolling or vandalism on their part, please let me know. Thanks
Should we separate the films into theatrical, TV and direct ot video? A lot of templates seem to do that. ★Trekker ( talk) 02:05, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Edit history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Disney_Parks,_Experiences_and_Products
Someone decided to add in promotion for themselves or their favorite vlogger(s) in the attractions section and has caused a back and forth contest between other vloggers and/or their fans.
The unrelated/unsourced section has been removed for now but will likely be back. Throwawaybutnotrlly ( talk) 12:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Stop reverting MY edits on WLAJ. It is actually really irrevelant. REALLY. REALLY. IRREVELANT. STOP. REVERTING.THIS.
OR ELSE MVCG66B3R WILL REVERT YOUR EDITS AND BLOCK U. CentralTime301 ( talk) 22:47, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney Music Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page D23 ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:54, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WLAJ; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:33, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
"removed information not directly related to WYTU from info box, removed unsourced §" Then there should be separate articles on the Rockford and South Bend stations. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 14:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mvcg66b3r. I noticed that you recently removed content from WISN-TV without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 23:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at WISN-TV. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CentralTime301 ( talk) 17:54, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
What "facts" are you talking about? I'm just following the MOS and Mrschimpf's suggestions. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:08, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
The file File:PacProFootball Logo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Superseded by vector version
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Masum Reza
📞 09:16, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, regarding this edit, how exactly is the image «full of errors»? The French channel's coverage depicted on the map was extracted from satellite provider Canal+ Horizons, a Francophone TV operator in Africa that carries French-language TV networks in its offering; that includes children channels like Disney Channel France. You can even check by yourself using the programming guide from the TV provider and compare it with the Metropolitan French counterpart operator also broadcasting the same channel. This is also true for coverage in French territories outside of Europe (New Caledonia, French Guyana, Martinique); as those territories are French, they receive French channels, including this one in French TV providers such as Canal+ Caraïbes for the French Caribbean that also operates in Haiti since 2015 (thus also receiving Disney Channel France along with French kids channels such as Gulli) or Vini in French Polynesia, which also carries the same Francophone networks.
If you have any questions about the map, ask me -- Bankster ( talk) 00:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Please go to talk page of the entry in re the reference to Hercules and Xena. I decided to initiate a dialogue. Dgabbard ( talk) 17:46, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Why did you have to reverts edits made by some users on WLAJ a few months ago? Is it because of WP:MOS? Or is it because you want to edit it your way? Main CentralTime301 page and talk 19:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 835.9 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you.-- IanDBeacon ( talk) 23:26, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Just to let you know, Spshu, Viacom is now a disambiguation page. So when you link to the company, the way you did at A&E Networks, please use:
[[Viacom (2005–present)|Viacom]]
Thank you for your edits and for your support in this! P. I. Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 22:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I placed an archive bot on top of your talk page, because it was getting long and needed archiving (see here). Take their advice and please don't take it off. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 18:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Mvcg66b3r, place an archive bot on your talk page because it is long and needs archiving. Cheers! Central Time 301 19:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at WLNS-TV 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Cheers! Central Time 301 19:49, 19 November 2019 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spshu reported by User:CentralTime301 (Result: ). Thank you. Cheers! Central Time 301 19:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for: making serious mistakes on WLNS-TV. Cheers! Central Time 301 20:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User talk:CentralTime301. Cheers! Central Time 301 20:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Look, I agree there's at least a discussion to be had about whether it needs at article, but can you at least stop reverting to the old version on Marvel Anime? It looks like it was written by a five year old and doesn't have any English sources, whereas I at least pulled from pages WP considers reliable like ANN and Crunchyroll. If you HAVE to do it, at least merge the new version in instead of leaving it a broken mess. -- Cyberlink420 ( talk) 18:25, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Verve Records, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Decca ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:34, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Title-- Esaïe Prickett ( talk) 00:11, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 02:21, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! | |
Hello Spshu, 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 2020. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
You currently appear to be 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. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Deep fried okra 18:10, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Based on your interest in this issue, you are invited to comment at Talk:WNGH-TV#RfC about TV and radio station style variances. Thanks. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 19:15, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
On 28 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Crossroads Village (Michigan), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Crossroads Village in Genesee County, Michigan, has a narrow huckleberry? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Crossroads Village (Michigan). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Crossroads Village (Michigan)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WJLA-TV; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 13:45, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for [37]! 192.101.255.184 ( talk) 19:46, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from
Biography (TV program) into
A&E Networks. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. —
Diannaa (
talk) 00:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 854.4 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you.— Diannaa ( talk) 00:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you changed the (home to right) standard in the xfl 2020 season and the website you used as a reference did not do that but did a winner to the left and loser to the right, example: BATTLEHAWKS 15, RENEGADES 9. Here the home is on the right. That is why I unfortunately had to revert your edit and keep the american standard of away to the left and home to the right. Sorry for the inconvenience. Mifoi123 ( talk) 23:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Disneynature 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please stop editing the Dolphin Reef information against its article's information. --
JN95 (
talk) 21:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
The discussion continues on the specific Talk page of the entry. Regards -- JN95 ( talk) 21:19, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disney–ABC Domestic Television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lost ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 14:57, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
You reverted the whole thing, thus reverting my corrections. Just fix the stuff you think needs fixing. Also, please archive your talk page. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 00:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bob Chapek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Walt Disney Studios ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:37, 29 February 2020 (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. Cyberlink420 ( talk) 13:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Mvcg66b3r. I noticed that you recently removed content from KSHV-TV without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 16:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you want to change up the format. That's fine as long as you keep EVERYONE that is on the list. If you don't, I will remove you from editing this page. Cytkory
Your recent editing history at List of management of The Walt Disney Company 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Please stop editing the List of management of The Walt Disney Company information against its article's information.
Cytkory (
talk) 02:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
FUCK YOU! Cytkory ( talk) 01:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm back and I have calmed down, but please explain to me how an official press release from Disney is not a good source. Also, you don't have to undo everything to make it better in YOUR eyes. I appreciate where your coming from, but I don't want to restart this argument again. Cytkory ( talk) 01:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed you've undone my edit to Sky Documentaries and reverted back to the redirect? I'm just wondering why that's been done - and by the way, the redirect was broken as it is to a section which isn't on that page. I've fixed the redirect. -- Tvcameraop ( talk) 18:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
What Do You Mean By "Unexplained"?
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A&E Networks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Orchard ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey, I really need you to be on your best behaviour with the List of management of The Walt Disney Company issue, leading by example rather than being revert-heavy. Please use the talk page. If the other editor doesn't participate in discussions in say, a week, make your move, and if they revert without discussion, leave the article the way it is, and then come see me or another admin. You don't want to get caught up in sanctions. You might also look for ways to make smaller changes that might not be as controversial, so that any specific changes the other editor disputes can be identified, unless they're just blanket-reverting all of your edits. Obviously it's not cool for someone to stonewall changes to articles while refusing to discuss. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 01:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Just because PlayStation Productions will release films and is part of the Sony family doesn't mean it's part of the SPMPG. The founders of PlayStation Productions will report to the heads of SIE. It's not acceptable because it's not part of SPE. Show a proper reference for it and stop vandalizing Wikipedia.
173.93.207.154 ( talk) 07:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Please stop putting unimportant information about producing partners into the article. You can place a source next to the production companies in the infobox but it's not vital to know who's shopping the film. Rusted AutoParts 19:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
According to Template:Film studios, there seems to be some questionable edits, such as two studios owned by the same company in the same template. Example would be that Warner Bros. also owns Bad Robot Productions and Spyglass Media Group and yet they are in the same template as with Warner Bros. Also IMAX Filmed Entertainment redirects to the IMAX article. I recommend you read [[Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates# Wikipedia:Reliable sources or Wikipedia:Navigation template.-- 98.182.134.231 ( talk) 00:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
When using an archived material of The Hollywood Reporter (since 2006), Variety (since 1991) or The LA Times or The NY Times, we need to check your citations. Should I use VarietyUltimate, then check to see the text. -- 172.127.114.25 ( talk) 12:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Can you please stop reverting my edit on WLAJ? It is considered disruptive and if you try to keep reverting these edits, I will have to file a report on WP:AN/3 about you. 107.242.113.16 ( talk) 18:32, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
I was telling the truth on the logo for 20th Century Studios. Picturemill animated it and it was on the picturemill's website reel. -- Rod14 ( talk) 13:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to discuss the distributor for Hulk: Where Monsters Dwell. I am aware that it did not receive a theatrical release, but at the same time, it still appears to have been distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures and not by Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment. On the Company Credits section on the film's IMDb page, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures is listed as the distributor. And keep in mind that Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment is the name of a specific label used to release films associated with the Disney brand rather than being the division responsible for all direct to video films released by the company. Thanks. The Editor 155 ( talk) 14:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Okay thanks for the info. The Editor 155 ( talk) 16:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Can I and Katlenmeyer collaborate on the Scott Free Productions#History page, by making various sources more realistic? -- 172.127.114.25 ( talk) 06:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I think one citation on the Scott Free Productions#History article that the source appears to be invalid, by using a more realistic Variety source. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:60D5:E003:3DA2:3327 ( talk) 06:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
We have to analyze Percy Main's deal with Paramount, using Variety and Hollywood Reporter sources on Scott Free Productions#History page! -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:60D5:E003:3DA2:3327 ( talk) 18:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to WLNS-TV, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 107.77.189.39 ( talk) 16:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
I forgot Roger Birnbaum had an experience working at Henry Winkler's Company (by the time it had non-exclusive deals with Paramount and ABC) prior to 1985. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:CCD9:DD1D:9558:5914 ( talk) 20:23, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George R. Poulos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George R. Poulos until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn ( talk) 20:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ABC Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harm's Way ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Just letting you know that someone put back the Marvel Animated Universe article page, I know you deleted it so I just wanted to let you know, also do you know where that name came from? as far as I know it was never officially referred to as such. Aaa11769 ( talk) 08:24, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited RFD-TV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Branson.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
The 1981 founding date for Amblin Entertainment should not be correct. -- 2600:1700:4300:2C8F:308D:1E37:8815:3F7C ( talk) 02:48, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages are difficult to read and load slowly over slow connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 887.1 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{ help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you. 67.85.37.186 ( talk) 19:46, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Spshu. I suggest you come to the ANI discussion at [39] and contribute your own viewpoint on the issues being discussed there. Mvcg66b3r ( talk) 16:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Spshu, your talk page is on my watchlist (probably from reverting Nate Speed abuse via Twinkle) and when the ANI notice showed up in my watchlist, I realized that I haven't seen your name in a long while. I hope you are doing well and please take care. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 19:50, 15 January 2021 (UTC) |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeff Wright (politician), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Wright (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry Bankert until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Bearcat ( talk) 19:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Darryl Buchanan, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darryl Buchanan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Woredas of Ethiopia. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 6#Template:Woredas of Ethiopia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Platonk ( talk) 04:33, 6 December 2021 (UTC)