User talk:24.7.196.180

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. I just wanted to point out that we cannot accept content that has been copy and pasted from other websites, as this may violate copyright. Thank you. Func( t, c ) 01:38, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Please do not remove blocks of text without explanation. Thanks,--TheDoctor10 (talk|email) 07:29, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Serenity results

Please stop adding material to Serenity (film) pushing points of view for which you provide no sources and removing other statements with sources. Wikipedia is not a blog, but an encyclopedia. Even though anyone can edit its articles, it has standards which should be followed. When controversial opinions are expressed, they are virtually guaranteed to be removed unless citations from publications making these claims are included. Even then, they may be removed for trying to slant an article toward a particular point of view, which is not acceptable. (This applies as much to any attempts to cast Serenity in a positive light without sources to backup such claims.) Thank you for your cooperation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

On a similar note, I've removed most of your recent additions of negative reviews to the Serenity page, not because they're unsourced, but because they give undue weight to the minority critical view. I'd like to hear your reasons for those additions, if you care to defend them, at the talk page. Thanks! —Josiah Rowe 04:32, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
I've again removed your attempt to cast a #2 showing as a negative, because it just doesn't make sense. It's like calling an athlete a failure because they only won the silver Olympic medal. Until you rephrase in such a way that makes basic sense (and I suspect there are ways to do this; they just don't come to mind at the moment), and don't sound like you are pushing a critical view, I will keep removing these statements as POV. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
If you're going to continue to push your POV in the Serenity article, could you please at least give explanations for your edits in the "edit summary" and respond to the comments on the talk page? I'd like to reach some consensus, but it's very difficult when your only action is constant reversion and editing. I want to assume good faith, but your continued silence makes it difficult.
Although I freely admit that I like Firefly and Serenity, and am disappointed at the film's box office results, I'm trying to keep the article NPOV. As I've said on the talk page and in the summary of my edits, Wikipedia:WikiProject Films recommends citing Rotten Tomatoes or another critic-compendium site, which is why I'm a bit frustrated that you keep removing it. Second, if you insist on trying to spin the #2 opening as a negative, it might help if you could give a citation of any critic or pundit who expected it to open at #1. I also don't understand why, in the total box office predictions, you're removing the specific citation of Brandon Gray of Box Office Mojo (widely recognized as the best box office site on the net) and replacing it with a range of figures without a citation. Finally, your latest edit is factually inaccurate: according to Box Office Mojo, Serenity's budget was $39 million, not $40 to $50.
I'm saying all this because I just want the article to be fair and accurate. You and I may differ on the merits of the film, but as far as Wikipedia is concerned that should be irrelevant. Can't we find some common ground here? —Josiah Rowe 06:49, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

You are close to breaking WP:3RR, Wikipedia's 3 revert rule on Serenity (film). Please discontinue this, and discuss the edits with the other editors and try to work out your differences. If you do not cease, you will be temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. ∞Who?¿? 08:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

You have been blocked for 24 hours for reverting more than three times within a 24 hour period on Serenity (film). Please stop doing this and discuss your edits with the other editors. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 12:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Did you miss the part where the admin said, "Please stop doing this and discuss your edits with the other editors"?—Josiah Rowe 21:36, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
You're in for it now buddy.Gateman1997 22:24, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I have protected Serenity (film) in an attempt to get you to engage in conversation with your fellow editors. If you will not take this hint and actually talk to them to resolve your differences, I shall have to conclude, in future, that your edits on that article are calculated to be disruptive and treat accordingly treat them as vandalism. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 02:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Budget for Serenity

Please refrain from reverting to a 40-50 million dollar budget. The budget for Serenity is confirmed as 39 million dollars. Revert this again and you will be reported.Gateman1997 02:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

You were warned. You have been blocked for a further 24 hours. When you return, unless you engage in conversation with the other editors to come to a consensus, the blocks will get progressively longer. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 02:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Serenity, again

Hi. I don't know why you have such an aversion to conversation, but I'm going to try again. The Serenity page doesn't need a blow-by-blow account of weekly results in every country. I don't think any other movie page on Wikipedia has as much detail on its box office results. We need to summarize the results fairly and neutrally. I remain open to dialogue, should you choose to abandon your apparent policy of silence. —Josiah Rowe 17:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm really getting curious as to why you can't use edit summaries or talk pages to communicate. It's almost an interesting case study. I wonder: is it just for the sake of irking fans, or is there something more deep-rooted? Do you feel that communicating in a normal fashion would make you appear weak or impotent? (More impotent, that is, than someone whose every edit is reverted must feel already...)
In your own strange fashion, you are managing to communicate a bit: you did provide a link for the cancellation of Serenity's theatrical release in Greece (although not Germany, which as far as I know is still going as planned). And because of that link, I adjusted the sentence from "many countries" to "at least seven countries". It's almost like a normal Wikipedia editing process, with collaboration and interaction between editors. You ought to try it some time. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR again

You have been blocked for 48 hours for reverting more than three times within a 24 hour period on Serenity (film). As you've repeatedly violated this rule, I've imposed a longer block in the hope that you will finally get the message. Please stop doing this and discuss your edits with the other editors. -- ChrisO 08:58, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shania Twain

Please provide sources for your changes to the Shania Twain article. We cannot accept original research or unverifiable facts. Without sources, your changes to Shania Twain will continue to be reverted. --Darth Revert (AKA Deskana) (talk) 18:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)