Geraldo Perez
| This is Geraldo Perez's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33Auto-archiving period: 10 days  |
Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
IP: 1.145.35.251 edit
Hello Geraldo, To let you know the Australian IP who is constantly changing "special effects" is now operating from IP:1.145.35.251, having been blocked from 101.180.97.95 and previously operating from 1.145.121.196. I have reported the latest round of changes to the Admins, but have not the time to change all the edit-warring back to the original consensus versions. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Reverted edit in Inside Out 2 edit
Hi Geraldo, I noticed that you reverted my edit on Inside Out 2 with an edit summary saying "unsorced". However, I did not add any new information to the article and instead just changed some grammar. I know that the issue I was trying to solve has since been fixed, but I guess I just want to ask you why you did that? I have no idea how Twinkle works but did you just see that I added 2 bytes of data to the article and since I didn't add a source, reverted it? Sorry if I sound too accusatory. I have a lot of respect for your anti-vandalism work. Cheers. GoldRomean (talk) 02:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- @GoldRomean: The unsourced content I was referring to in my edit summary was made by a string of edits by an IP before your edit. It looks like you fixed a grammar error made by the IP edits so it got undone as it was tied to what the IP did. I did try to revert the IP edits only but your changes prevented that as it modified what the IP changed. My edit summary was related to the string of edits I reverted, not yours directly. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I understand now. Thanks for clearing things up. GoldRomean (talk) 12:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Bettany-Rhys-Jones connection edit
Regardless of how Paul Bettany and Duchess Sophie are connected, why don’t you think it might be worth mentioning that her godfather’s son is a world famous actor? It’s sourced and doesn’t take up much room. AzXpOmU (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- And I hope this doesn’t spiral into an argument. I’m just curious. AzXpOmU (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- @AzXpOmU: I commented on Bettany's talk page. Basically it just mentions something their grandparents did and that connection is so far removed to the point of being irrelevant to their lives. It is not a relationship of any practical sort. If that connection led to something notable it might be worth mentioning, but so far is has nothing to do with either of them and impacts neither of their lives in any way. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)