165.228.41.149

To edit, please log in.

Last edited:
Last edited by:

12:06, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
PrimeBOT (talk · contribs)

---

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Editing advice

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please make sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

The edit summary appears in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list and
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! PhilKnight (talk) 11:41, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

What he said. Your numerous unexplained edits on October 23rd 2014 to the article Final Fantasy:The Spirits Within have been reverted. Some more advice: IMDb is generally not considered a reliable source for wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. Even if it was, when you find a new source that conflicts with a previously used source, your new source does not automatically over-ride the previous one. The best thing to do here would be to obtain consensus on the articles talk page. Accordingly your replacement of the reference which states the film is 108 minutes in length with the IMDb source which states it is 106 minutes is one of your edits which I have reverted. Please also do NOT use bare urls on wikipedia, especially on a good or featured article. Freikorp (talk) 04:57, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Battlefield Earth (film), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 04:21, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

December 2014

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Gigli, you may be blocked from editing. SummerPhD (talk) 15:26, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Reference Errors on 10 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the The Fault in Our Stars (film) page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Wiplash

Hi, I recently undid one of your edit you made at Whiplash (2014 film) because official website state Andrew's surname as Neiman not Neyman. See http://sonyclassics.com/whiplash, and go to plot section in there. I hope this clear up confusion on your part. Regards--Jockzain (talk) 06:12, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

January 2015

Hello, I'm Smileguy91. I noticed that you recently removed some content without 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; I restored the removed content. 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! smileguy91^talk 23:36, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Mostly MOS issues

Please see MOS:FILM, MOS:ITALICS, and MOS:LEAD. You can't just bulk remove the contents of a Good Article's lead and move it into the body. That makes the lead entirely too small. Similarly, you should not editorialize about the reception without quoting a reliable source. "X received mostly positive reviews" needs a secondary source that engages in analysis. Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, and other review aggregators are great resources to reporting critical reception, but I'm not too keen on editors' use of them to synthesize what the film's reception was. Just report the RT and MC scores flatly without giving your analysis on the reception. Occasionally, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, Los Angeles Times or The New York Times will post an analysis of a film's reception. That's what I'd like to see quoted as a secondary source that engages in analysis. As far as italics go, please don't use italics to quote text. That is entirely incorrect use of italics. If you simply must move independent sections into one mega-section called "reception", I would prefer that you did it with a bit more care. I really dislike that layout, but it does exist in a few Good Articles. However, the way you're doing it, you're blanking sections, saving the article, and then apparently re-adding the sections. That can be easily misconstrued as vandalism, and I'd suggest that you at least use an edit summary to alert editors as to what your intentions are. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:27, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

It's me again. I noticed that you removed a citation in this edit. If you find two reliable sources that disagree, you should include both of them. For numbers, like film budgets and grosses, you would implement this as a range, using an en dash. Don't remove one of them in favor of the other. You seem to have a fair understanding of the MOS, but it would be advantageous to read through User:Tony1/Beginners' guide to the Manual of Style and Help:Introduction to the Manual of Style. That way, you'll stop getting irritable messages from me when you accidentally violate some obscure, bureaucratic rule. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:19, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I've already explained this once. Stop removing sourced data from articles. Additionally, the IMDB is not a reliable source. If you continue to disruptively edit articles, you can be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

You are still adding IMDb as a reference. NinjaRobotPirate has explained quite clearly why that cannot be done. If you continue to add it you editing can be considered WP:DISRUPTIVE and that can lead to a block. There is no need to that to occur if you follow the editing policies. MarnetteD|Talk 22:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

Hello, I'm Frosty. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Black Hawk Down (film)— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —Frosty ☃ 23:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Interstellar (film), 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. — kikichugirl ^speak up! 06:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:03, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Some tips

Wikipedia is a community. By trying to improve the site, you are a part of the community, too. While your efforts to improve the site are appreciated, they come with the responsibility of discussing matters with other users to minimize conflict and maximize efficiency. Despite the name, the Administrator's noticeboard is not restricted to administrators, or even to users with accounts. It is in your best interest to come by this thread to let us know you're receiving messages and will try to be more communicative in the future.

Just a few things to keep in mind:

• Wikipedia has some policies and guidelines meant to keep the site uniform and quickly settle various issues. They're derived from site-wide consensus.
• An extremely important policy is assuming good faith, because this site operates off of cooperation and consensus.
• If you find a change you made has gone away, discuss it on the article's talk page instead of making the same edit over and over.

Those blue links are to different policy, guideline, and help pages with more detailed information. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:45, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive873#Disruptive IP user removes sourced content. You will get blocked if you continue to remove reliably sourced content. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Stormbreaker (film), 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. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Stormbreaker (film), you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You seem to be having repeated problems accurately reporting what reliable sources say, as recently at Whiplash (2014 film) and Stormbreaker (film). It does not matter whether you disagree with the sources, do not understand what they say or are trying make articles inaccurate. If you continue to refuse to discuss the issues and add incorrect information (or remove correct information) you will be blocked from editing. SummerPhD (talk) 16:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Discussion at the talk page

There's a discussion going on at Talk:Stormbreaker (film). Please join in. There is question over whether the budget figures from The Numbers are wrong, and I know that you believe that they are. This is your chance to get a consensus to remove the number. I hope that you'll take this opportunity to engage. Edit warring isn't doing either one of us any good, and I think it will reduce tensions between both of us if we can hash this out civilly. For my part, I'm sorry for edit warring with you over this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:04, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Idiocracy, 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. DonIago (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

May 2015

Hello, I'm MelbourneStar. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Frailty (film)  with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 04:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Reign of Fire (film) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 09:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to The Babadook

Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 12:42, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

February 2016

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Your latest edits at Last Cab to Darwin (film) confirm why you are currently blocked from editing. You rounded A$7,148,904 to A$7 million, then added a source that states the figure was A$5.7 million. You either do not understand what a "source" is for or do not care. You have resisted every attempt to explain things to you, offers for adoption, etc.

Per WP:EVADE, any editor may revert any/all of your edits without further explanation. Please expect any of your edits that are not immediately obviously constructive to be reverted as vandalism. If I grow tired of this, I'll re-open the sock case and have you blocked again. - SummerPhD^v2.0 17:46, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and the other reasons you are currently blocked are your inability to round off numbers and complete nonsense like this. - SummerPhD^v2.0 18:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Fantastic Four (2015 film). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be undone.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

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. Thank you. DarkKnight2149 01:15, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

January 2020

Hello, I'm CatcherStorm. I noticed that you made a change to an article, The Hand That Rocks the Cradle (film), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CatcherStorm ^talk 01:30, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Hello, I'm NinjaRobotPirate. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Tomcats (2001 film), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

October 2020

Hello, I'm Danbloch. Your recent edit(s) to the page Saving Face (2004 film) appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. Thank you. Dan Bloch (talk) 20:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

April 2021

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to I Love You, Man—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

June 2021

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at VFL/AFL games records. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

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. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 12:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

---