User talk:Cartoon Boy

Hi, I saw a few grammatical errors on the new Star Wars movie page. The editing option says it is locked. Can I share the errors with you to fix? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1006:B15C:22CB:C4FE:EB31:CA3A:68B1 (talk) 01:19, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

About the 2020 Democratic primaries article: I provided sourcing (Vanity Fair article) for Gravel's withdrawal in the timeline section under July 31, 2019. I believe you should restore the page to its former condition while adding the source used in the timeline to the info box/table in the candidates section. I should add that I'm asking you to restore because I have no idea how to do that.

Aug. 2006

Welcome!

Hello, Cartoon Boy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Powers ^T 02:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln and Interstellar

You removed my proposals for deletion for both upcoming Spielberg films. The template indicated, "To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page." Since you did not do this in the edit summaries, do you mind explaining on the films' respective talk pages why these should not be deleted? There is very little existing information about these films as of late, as opposed to some other upcoming film articles. If your argument is not sufficient, I will promote these articles for deletion. --Erik 00:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Walker (producer)

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article John Walker (producer), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Telly addict 17:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pixar Planet

A tag has been placed on Pixar Planet, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Pixar Planet. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 22:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eli Fucile

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Eli Fucile, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Superpika66 (talk) 01:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Heath Ledger. Your edits appear to be 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. Thank you. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to The Simpsons. Thank you for your helpful edit, but an edit summary is also helpful to other Wikipedia editors. --Ericdn (talk) 03:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please use appropriate edit summaries. Your continued failure to do so will be interpreted an intentional vandlaism. Bearian (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:2239.news lg conan logo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Hi Cartoon Boy!
We thank you for uploading File:2239.news lg conan logo.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot.

--John Bot III (talk) 20:22, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Concerning this file, I uploaded a new version taken from the NBC Universal website, but, in the end, I think the logo you uploaded looked better after the upload, so I reverted it. But, if you want to again revert it to the alternate logo, you are more than welcome to. You originated the file, and thus, I will leave the decision up to you. AriTotle (talk) 10:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combining Talk Discussions Re Disney Film Lists

Dear SpikeJones, Kasper2006, Elikrotupos, SWatsi, Blitz Lutte, NealP, LtPowers, SofaKing381222, Collectionian, Cartoon Boy, Casey14, Chris1219, NuclearWarfare, SkinnyPrude, and Parker 1297:

Recently, it appears that you all have been interested in the various Disney discussions regarding the proper categorization of Disney animated films. There has been recent activity regarding the proper structure of the various Disney feature length film lists. Unfortunately the discussions regarding the lists / pages are taken place on a number of talk pages. Before we get further into a long discussion regarding the various structural issues with regards to List of Disney theatrical animated features, Template:Disney theatrical animated features, Walt Disney Animated Classics, Category:Disney animated features canon, List of Disney feature films‎ and what ever other lists are out there, I would suggest that we somehow combine the discussions (both past and present) into one place. This will allow easy review on single page for users interested in this matter. It will also allow future users an easy access to whatever rational is used to support the structure of the various lists (including keeping or merging certain lists.). I believe that in placing this discussion in one central location, it alleviates repetitive discussion, allows issues are not constantly revisited in different locations and hopefully sets the future standard in updating the various lists with the verifiable sources. I honestly do not know if there is Wikipedia policy on this, nor do I know what the proper way of creating such a place. But I do believe it would useful.

I have posted this suggestion on the all the User’s talk pages above and apologize if I have missed any person who may be interested in this matter. If you know of a user interested in this matter, please invite any that person to discuss these issues. .If I have included you and you have no interest in this matter, I sincerely apologize and please delete this message.

cc:
Flair Girls, creator of Template:Disney theatrical animated features
FuriousFreddy, creator of Category:Disney animated features canon
Plainsong, creator of List of Disney feature films‎

Sincerely yours, Jvsett (talk) 04:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page began, just because. See WP:WikiProject Disney/Animated Film Article Cleanup. SpikeJones (talk) 13:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tavix | Talk 15:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 film)

Thank you for your nomination, the official A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 film) page has begun here, all contributions are greatly encouraged. ISTHnR | Knock Knock | Who's There? 13:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Idol

I wanted to let you know that your recent edit to American Idol has been undone. While I presume you're working in good faith, your table contains the same information as is already present in the article. If you could please explain why your table should be included, please provide an answer here or on the article's talk page. Thank you, and happy editing! --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update--I've started a dialogue on the article's talk page. Please present your reasoning for maintaining two redundant sets of tables there, to allow the editors to establish some consensus on how many times we should post the same things. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Idol template

I have reverted your removal of the starting/ending years of Dunkleman, Abdul and DioGuardi from the American Idol template again. Without the years it makes it appear the hosts and the judges have been with the show every season. If you still feel this way, you need to discuss it on the talk page before and gaining a consensus before making the change again. Aspects (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the order has been changed numerous times over the past month, could you please join the discussion at Template talk:American Idol#Judge order so we can get a working consensus to point to, to avoid future conflict with the order? Aspects (talk) 19:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pirate film

The article Pirate film has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Redundant explanation, unreferenced.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 02:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ben Affleck

Template:Ben Affleck has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for deletion page. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove referenced information

Please do not alter content in contradiction of references unless you can demonstrate good reason for doing so, as you recently did at Paranormal Activity (film). IMDB is considered a reliable source for film release dates. To overturn it you would need to provide a source that is deemed superior. Just changing it because you disagree is not an acceptable action. Manning (talk) 03:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning. If you change referenced information again without a reliable source or a consensus agreement you will be blocked. Manning (talk) 03:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Fantastic Mr. Fox. Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 05:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Prep & Landing

The article Prep & Landing has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable television special.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:25, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:David Benedictus

Template:David Benedictus has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Garrett Warren

The article Garrett Warren has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable stunt coordinator. Filmography nothing but a copy/paste from IMDB. No significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources. Completely fails WP:N and WP:BIO; without coverage in third-party, reliable sources, also against WP:BLP

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In order to write better articles...

You might want to read WP:FIRST. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 04:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Cartoon Boy! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 8 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 389 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Doug Sweetland - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Carlos Grangel - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Darla K. Anderson - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Steve O'Donnell (writer) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Ned Goldreyer - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Rachel Pulido - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Jeffrey Ventimilia - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Joshua Sternin - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Tonight Show

Why did you undo my edits? There are three separate discussions in that article about the recent controversy. - Brian Kendig (talk) 06:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Late welcome

I have been following your edits at Kiss (band) and would just like to welcome you to Wikipedia. If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line on my talk page. I hope you continue to contribute to the encyclopedia. J04n(talk page) 03:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jabberwocky

I take that you watched Alice in Wonderland today? [1] —Mike Allen 01:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So I assume you enjoyed it? I'm leaving to see the 9:30pm (CST) showing (like right now). It seems some critics are having issues with Burton's vision. Fortunately I take their opinion with a grain of salt. After all, I'm a Saw fan, and we know what they think of that since they can't get passed criticizing the "gore" part to enjoy the storyline.. so I just read their reviews to add to Wikipedia articles. LOL. So I guess you have some interest in the article? I'm thinking about working on for GA in the near future, if you're interested. If not, I understand, as it can be time consuming. —Mike Allen 02:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and it has been sold out here most of the night.. —Mike Allen 02:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Just a quick note to remind you to please remind you to use the edit summary boxes. You made small changes to all the Star Trek movie pages but we have to manually check what change was made if you don't state it :) ῤerspeκὖlὖm^{in ænigmate} ^{( talk )} 20:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Double Wonderful and others

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated articles are Double Wonderful, How I Conquered Your Planet, Joshua Sternin, Jeffrey Ventimilia, Rachel Pulido, Jace Richdale, Ned Goldreyer, Peter Gaffney, David Richardson (writer), Steve Pepoon, Early Bloomer, Darren T. Holmes, Carlos Grangel, Ralph Sosa, Rob Oliver, Jim Morris (Pixar), You're a Big Boy Now (novel), This Animal is Mischievous, The Rabbi's Wife, The Antique Collector's Guide, Floating Down to Camelot. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the articles satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

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) 01:05, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek Navbox

Why would you remove the informative navbox for the elss informative one.. there is a reason it is the way it is, please stop changing it before it is considered vandalism. Your edit has been reverted by multiple editors already. If you think it should be changed, discuss it on the talk page there, a discussion about it has already started. This is why we have concensus on wikipedia. Alan - talk 02:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Redwall. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. I see from your Talk page that other Wikipedians have previously tried to encourage you to use Edit Summaries in line with Wikipedia standards, but to little or no avail. However, well done on actually using an Edit Summary once: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Monkey&diff=prev&oldid=357302083 Trafford09 (talk) 11:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy

Please do not create pages that do not, and will not meet the notability requirements for existence. The fact that someone reviewed the documentary does not make it notable, especially when the reviews themselves are from non-reputable sources. The documentary does not warrant a whole page to itself. If there is a reputable review, then add it to the franchise page. BIGNOLE (Contact me)

The article would require extensive coverage from third-party sources discussing everything from the making of the documentary to how they even put it all together. It isn't going to happen. That info is basically on the franchise page already, and it isn't that much. Documentaries of this nature rarely, if ever, become notable. There has already been a Nightmare documentary in the past (the one that accompanied the box set - that Nightmare Encyclopedia), and it wasn't that notable. You'll probably find some reviews on how well they did in covering the films, but nothing that is going to suggest that the documentary itself is notable. I only say this because I've gone through the same thing with Friday the 13th. The franchise page discusses the documentaries that were produced (both books and DVDs)--see Friday the 13th (franchise)#Documentaries--and none of them were notable in their own right. The problem stems primarily from the subject matter itself. It's nothing but a bunch of interviews from the cast and crew about the films they made. There's no substance to the article, because it wasn't like this was something 30 years in the making that they could never do. Nightmare has had multiple documentaries--both through books and videos--which means that this one isn't anything special in its own right. That is why I don't believe it will ever be notable enough for its own article. Build up what you can on the franchise page, and we'll see what's left when it's done. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:20, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't listen to him. His bias opinions go against community consensus. There are more reviews out there and they DO show notability. Joe Chill (talk) 01:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. That is rather rude of him to try to discourage someone from making a Wikipedia article about something which common sense would indicate it was notable. An official documentary about any notable series, is notable. Dream Focus 08:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Miley Cyrus. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. AussieLegend (talk) 03:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through your edit history AussieLegend, I have to say I am amazed to find that you actually use edit summaries every single time. I've never seen anyone do that, ever. Do you post things like this everywhere, or just to people you don't like for some reason? It does seem rather rude and very unnecessary. Dream Focus 08:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To Cartoon Boy and Dream Focus:

If you follow AussieLegend's link to edit summary, you will find wp:ES#Always_provide_an_edit_summary.

It's nothing personal - just helps fellow editors know that our edits are kosher. Trafford09 (talk) 23:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification to a contribitor of Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy

There is a current request for comments HERE that is discussing whether the article Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy should be merged and redirected to the Elm Street franchise article at A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise), or whether it has met, or has the ability to meet notability inclusion criteria in order to remain an independent independent article and be allowed to grow through regular editing. Findsources: [2],[3] All viewpoints are welcome. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy

On May 26, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy, which you created or substantially expanded. 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Template:The Rolling Stones

Look, hi, I left a message on the template's talk page about the template, might you read this! You have good edits, and it's not you, it's that the template must be entirely visible on one's computer monitor from left-to-right, without doing any side-scrolling. The admin SilkTork will take over with the new formatted manageable sub-templates! Please read the template talk page. Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 02:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Template:Peter Morgan. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.

In nearly 4 years that you have been on Wikipedia, you have been repeatedly warned, for not providing Edit summaries for most of your contributions.

Do you understand consensus? Policy agreed by consensus is - and I quote from the exact title of the policy section concerned - to "Help:Edit summary#Always provide an edit summary".

Do you agree with consensus? Do you have any comment to make, in your defense?

Trafford09 (talk) 07:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to templates

I notice that you've made >300 edits to templates. An impressive number ... Trafford09 (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paloma Faith/HolbyBlue

Just wanted to apologize for the revert, that was a bad call on my part. Happy editing :) Frickative 01:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mark Burgess (illustrator)

The article Mark Burgess (illustrator) has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Weaponbb7 (talk) 00:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Van Helsing

Hi there. While you are certainly correct that Van Helsing is not part of the original series of Universal Monsters films, I think it deserves a place somewhere on the template. It is a Universal film and was made as a tribute to the old Universal series. Universal even released DVDs of the old films which explicitly stated them to be "the classic films that inspired Van Helsing". It would make most sense for it to be in a "Tributes" section, but then it would be all by itself and might look a little silly.--Codenamecuckoo (talk) 08:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Charles Dickens. Do you have a question or contention with edit summaries? You have been reminded many times on this talkpage. Your edit was helpful, but an edit summary is also helpful to other Wikipedia editors. -- Spanglej (talk) 21:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Mark Burgess (illustrator)

I have nominated Mark Burgess (illustrator), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Burgess (illustrator). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Weaponbb7 (talk) 14:27, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The War for Late Night

Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for The War for Late Night. - Cirt (talk) 20:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It puzzles me why you added this section yourself. Trafford09 (talk) 00:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added that because that was me under an IP address. My apologies if I am not supposed to do that, even if I was that IP user. If that's the case, it won't happen again. Reply back if you want. - Cartoon Boy (talk) 1:04 am, Today (UTC+1)

Nice of you to discuss it. It does seem odd. But my major gripe with you, as you'll have realised, is your hitherto refusal to supply Edit Summaries. Any reason why you think you're exempt from consensus? Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 00:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Template:Conan O'Brien. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Still not tempted to discuss this? Trafford09 (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TOTD

Tip of the day...

Please summarize your work using the Edit summary box

If you make anything other than a minor edit to an article, it helps others if you fill in the edit summary. Edit summaries are visible in the page history, watchlists, and on Recent changes, so they help other users keep track of what is happening to a page.

If you use section editing, the summary box is filled in with the section heading by default (in gray text), which you can follow with more detail. You also can put links to articles in the edit summary. Just put double brackets around [[the article title]] like you would normally. The summary is limited to 255 characters, so many people use common abbreviations, such as sp for correcting spelling mistakes, rm for remove, ce for copy-edit, etc.

Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip

Law & Order video games

Hey, glad to see someone else working on the L&O stuff. There was a task force of editors under the Wikipedia:WikiProject Television banner at some point, but it seems to be inactive. Just wanted to run a thought regarding the by you. Seems to me there's two ways to link the game articles together and to connect them to the rest of the L&O articles.

One is to place a single link in the main franchise navbox pointing at the list in the franchise article, with a dedicated navbox for the games linking each of those articles together.

The second is to link all four games in the franchise navbox and place that on all the game articles, deleting the games-specific navbox as redundant.

I prefer the first, as the games, while certainly worthy of mention, are a relatively minor part of the franchise, and placing all the links directly into the franchise navbox begins to look like clutter and even seems a bit like undue weight.

Just wanted your thoughts. oknazevad (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that we don't want to over-emphasize the video games (though they did have the awesomeness of the late Jerry Orbach), but as Law & Order branded items, they are part of the franchise. At the very least, we owe it to readers that may have seen them to mention them. Which is why I think the first of the two mentioned solutions is the best.

I also long felt the need to split Exiled from the personnel listed on the bottom of the franchise navbox; it felt out of place there. (That section was once labeled "universe", and I believe it contained links to the no-longer extant New York Ledger article and the rather trivia-filled Hudson University one. It was a poorly categorized mishmash.)

If the video games are to be individually mentioned, they ought to be in their own section, but that would push Exiled into the miscellaneous category again, which I don't want.

Lastly, I believe there were a few licensed novels that may bear mentioning, both in the franchise article and in the "Other media" section of the navbox. oknazevad (talk) 16:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I never considered this edit warring, just the WP:BRD cycle at work.

I see what you're saying, but the problem there is that navbox template is designed for a single series. So while it would be appropriate for any one of the individual series, for the navbox for the franchise as a whole, it might not work. Strange as it might sound, my model for the Law & Order franchise template is actually Template: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, which is similar in that it is a multi-series property. That's one I've worked on before as well. oknazevad (talk) 22:34, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Starting fresh

Hello, CB. Good to talk. Always happy to start afresh. Nice to see you now supplying ESs. If you're clear about not wanting to forget them, you know you could always take advantage - as many of us do (myself included) - to avoid accidentally leaving edit summaries blank, of selecting "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" on the Editing tab of your user preferences.

The other thing we registered users have access to is the Help:Minor edit flag, which you might find sometimes useful. Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 04:38, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: L&O: LA casting

I totally agree, and think we should go that way. Finding sources might be difficult considering the newness of the series, but as the rationales for the casting become better known, they definitely warrant inclusion. The bonus materials on the inevitable DVD set will be a treasure trove, but that'll be a while. While I'm going to be pretty laden at work this week (being a teacher at the end of the quarter means spending hours grading tests, quizzes and papers), drop me a line if there's a thought you have regarding it.

We should probably also contact User:SVU4671 to join our efforts, as he's been pretty active on the L&O articles lately (and obviously is a fan considering the username). Maybe even reconstitute the Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Law & Order task force. That'd be fun. oknazevad (talk) 01:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paul Miller (director)

The article Paul Miller (director) has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ϣere SpielChequers 22:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Don Roy King

The article Don Roy King has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mhiji 03:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek template.

I am a little confused at what you are doing at the Star Trek template. Why was what changed? All I mainly know is that one link that I included was gone so I had to revert at the time being due to you probably removing other links. But what dd you mean in the edit summary? Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 19:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions to Christopher Nolan has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Wikipedia has a policy called Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, which discourages such edits. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reference to a reliable source. Thank you.-5- (talk) 09:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sherlock Holmes (2009 film series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sherlock Holmes (2009 film series) 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/Sherlock Holmes (2009 film series) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 20:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Miller (director) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Miller (director) 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/Paul Miller (director) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Alan - talk 03:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Don Roy King for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Don Roy King 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/Don Roy King 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Alan - talk 03:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. –BMRR (talk) 15:13, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Polanski template

Hi, I undid you reversal at Template:Roman Polanski since you didn't leave any edit summary with a reason for your edit. Basically decade breakdown should be avoided if it's not absolutely necessary. I know that many other film director navboxes don't follow this, but that is just a bigger reason to start doing it correctly. Smetanahue (talk) 02:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kiss Kruise: Wet, Wild & Rockin’

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 Kiss Kruise: Wet, Wild & Rockin’, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ttonyb (talk) 17:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of Piers Morgan Tonight guests

The article List of Piers Morgan Tonight guests has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced WP:Listcruft.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gurt Posh (talk) 09:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Piers Morgan Tonight guests for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Piers Morgan Tonight guests 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/List of Piers Morgan Tonight guests 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Gurt Posh (talk) 15:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tom Hanks

Template:Tom Hanks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:27 Club#Unsourced entries need to be removed

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:27 Club#Unsourced entries need to be removed. Please feel free to participate and provide any insight or opinion that you feel relates to the unsourced entries in the list. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:David Schwimmer

Template:David Schwimmer has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:59, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

I noticed you have been reverting recent improvements on the {{US Presidents}} template. I thought I would take a minute to explain to you why we are introducing these changes. One reason for changing the templates it to improve accessibility for visually impaired users using a screen reader. Whenever a screen reader encounters a dot, it calls out the word "dot". The material presents as a lot of tiny disjointed paragraphs rather than a list. With the new mark-up, the screen reader will announce that a list is coming, and then will proceed to read out the items on the list. Flatlist and application of the hlist class is about presenting the material as actual lists, which helps not just people with vision issues, but those viewing the site using phones and other non-traditional devices. Search engines also will read lists better.

The use of the dots is now deprecated, and have been since August. Each dot requires the application of a template, and templates are expensive, as they increase server load. There are limits as to how many templates can be placed on a page. Application of the latest method, using listclasses and bodyclasses to create the lists, results in a reduction in post-expand include size of 16% and a reduction in template argument size of 45% on the US Presidents template. This is a substantial improvement that will lead to quicker load times for pages and a better experience for our viewing audience.

The transition has not been trouble free; some kinks have had to be ironed out, and there may still be a ways to go. However, we have the templates displaying adequately in the two latest versions of the problematic Internet Explorer (IE8 and IE9), and we can't hold back development of Wikipedia for older, buggy browsers.

I am reverting your change to the US Presidents and Vice Presidents templates. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, -- Dianna (talk) 03:25, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Angelique move

Hi! First and foremost, I want to apologize for my admittedly undescriptive edit summary. With that being said, I moved the article to "Angélique Bouchard Collins" for two reasons: her name was spelled "Angélique" in Dark Shadows Resurrected, the companion book for the 1991 remake, and for consistency, as that was the spelling already used in the article. Is it possible that the spelling was changed for the 1991 series? Regardless, the official website for the new Dark Shadows movie spells it "Angelique", so I'm unsure of what to do. What do you think? Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article back to its former title. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 13:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Edens Edge

Template:Edens Edge has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Crystal Chesney-Thompson

The article Crystal Chesney-Thompson has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. MrX 18:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Templates: US Presidents & US Vice Presidents

Howdy Cartoon Boy. I noticed that the Templates have stopped showing the numberings again. Any clues as to why this happens? I'm guessing it's just a glitch. GoodDay (talk) 21:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hannibal Lecter (franchise)

Hello, Cartoon Boy. You have new messages at Nabahat's talk page.
Message added 08:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benedict Cumberbatch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hawking (film) (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) 09:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rita Ora, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Euphoria Tour (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) 08:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Joker (comics). 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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.

Jack Nicholson's Joker is a pop culture icon
Ledger's Joker won an oscar
Leto's joker has appeared in 6 seconds of a trailer.

What "you" will add or not add is as inconsequential as what "you" think is notable, because others will see what is missing and attempt to add it and it will be never ending, the next live action portrayal will go there, the next video game voice will go there. You've been told, you've had it explained to you, and you've chosen to edit war over it anyway, so now you can have a warning for it. Remove the others barring Hamill if you want, but you will not continue to add names. John DiMaggio has voiced him in one animated film (and hey, I don't think Emerson should be there either, it was a compromise), Storch is not notable, do you know how hard it was to even find a source for that? Kevin Michael Richardson? You deem these notable based on your own opinion and that isn't how Wikipedia works and you've been here long enough to know that just like you know you discuss instead of just keep reverting. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 01:00, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Upisodes listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Upisodes. Since you had some involvement with the Upisodes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. SONIC678|Hang out with me! 05:39, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alice Cooper discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poison (album). 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) 11:31, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Untitled fifth Bourne film, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Bourne Legacy. 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) 10:53, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of Star Wars films and television series

Thanks for fixing the links to List of Star Wars films and television series across the articles' "See also" sections! :) Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:50, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind

Please disregard this question here. I thought you added it and was asking for us to remove it. I missed the "if" part of your edit summary and was genuinely confused. My mistake. DarkKnight2149 01:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chris Terrio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian Paintbrush. 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) 10:25, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there...

Thought you might like to contribute your two-cents worth to this talk page disscussion. LLArrow (talk) 22:08, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Justice League Dark (Film) 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 (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). 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:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Rob Sinden (talk) 08:10, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on behalf of blocked/banned users

Hi. I am curious how/why you are restoring edits by the banned/blocked user Atomic Meltdown. Are you aware of WP:PROXYING? Nymf (talk) 22:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Batman FAR review

I have nominated Batman for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DarkKnight2149 19:19, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trump age

Hi, it looks like you put Trump's status as oldest new president into the opening paragraph. But it's already later in the lead. See Talk:Donald_Trump#Does_the_.22oldest_person.22_thing_really_belong_in_the_lead.3F.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nymf (talk) 16:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cartoon Boy. 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)[reply]

Kirsten Stewart

The very fact you think that just because a large majority of articles have an idiotbox and therefore, so should this, is confirmation that you actually know very little. Please try and have some respect for those who formed this consensus and think twice before reverting again. Cassianto ^Talk 18:36, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Respect where respect is due. Thank you. Cassianto ^Talk 22:28, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Chad Stahelski and David Leitch

Template:Chad Stahelski and David Leitch has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Don Cuan (talk) 02:59, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFC notification

Due to your editorial involvement in {{Alice}} I thought you might want to participate in the RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#RFC: Overhauling the Disney franchise templates for consistency.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:40, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFC notification

Due to your editorial involvement in {{Winnie-the-Pooh}} I thought you might want to participate in the RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#RFC: Overhauling the Disney franchise templates for consistency.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tom Ford

Template:Tom Ford has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:It Stephen King

Template:It Stephen King has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Blade Runner (franchise), but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Hakken (talk) 13:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cartoon Boy. 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)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele

Template:Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --wooden superman 15:43, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Batman in popular media

I've started a discussion on the templates talk page, please make your case there.★Trekker (talk) 07:45, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use the talkpage for discussion, don't edit war.★Trekker (talk) 15:35, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.★Trekker (talk) 01:37, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've had hours to reply and now your excuse has become "I won't be able to discuss because I will be busy". That's very poor behaviour in my opinion. And when you did take time to reply you didn't even remotly bother to try to justify why the links should be kept on.★Trekker (talk) 01:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cartoon Boy. 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)[reply]

JOBTITLES

Hello. Regarding your recent reverts of JOBTITLES compliance edits, I know there are editors who disagree with the JOBTITLES changes. I hope we can agree that the solution is not evidence-free edit warring at article level, but rather evidence-based discussion at community level. Vote-by-revert situations are not constructive. It remains to be seen whether current discussion will result in further JOBTITLES changes, but until it does we should go with the guideline we have. Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ 14:15, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Last month, I went through the trouble of complying with the discussions around WP:JOBTITLES, which calls for lower-capping. Now, you're gonna go around & undo all that? :( GoodDay (talk) 03:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Hollywood Vampires

Template:Hollywood Vampires has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --wooden superman 14:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ed and Lorraine Warren

Hi Cartoon Boy. I think you may have overlooked that the Ed and Lorraine Warren article covers actual claims made by the subjects, rather than details from their various horror films. Supernatural claims are treated very differently on WP from entertainment articles/fictional universes etc. Best regards, - LuckyLouie (talk) 16:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re this... thanks, that explains what happened. Ignore the above. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:21, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You also may now be in a wp:editwar.Slatersteven (talk) 09:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

- MrX 🖋 02:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:John Kricfalusi

Template:John Kricfalusi has been nominated for merging with Template:Spümcø. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 20:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen King, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page On Writing. 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) 06:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bedelia Du Maurier for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bedelia Du Maurier 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/Bedelia Du Maurier 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 until the discussion has finished.

Spinixster (chat!) 02:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit on Asperger Syndrome

I noticed you added some quotation marks, and I just want to confirm that those are actually direct quotes from the cited sources.

With Love from Cassie Schebel (talk) 13:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm 90% sure that these are; of course I may have read them wrong while going in and looking at the sources. If that is indeed the case, please revert my edits. Cartoon Boy (talk) 04:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Emma D'Arcy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Black Queen.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:20, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]