User talk:86.111.223.190

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thank you for experimenting with the page Alan Oliver on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Charlesknight 16:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] February 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from Jack Bauer. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Will 23:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, please ignore this warning

[edit] Your edit to Darryl Broadfoot

Your recent edit to Darryl Broadfoot (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 12:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to International Security Assistance Force

Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia, as you did to International Security Assistance Force. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Warrush 14:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC) (suitable for nonsense)

[edit] DVD material

Wikipedia is not to advertise your wares. The release of a DVD is significant. A listing of the special features is not. Look at any other movie release on Wikipedia, and there isn't a listing of what's on the disk. Wikipedia is not an advertising medium. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 13:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you're the one being difficult, and using the article to hawk the DVD. Don't get me wrong - I love the DVDs, and I enjoy the special features. That has nothing to do with that. What this is about is that the special features are simply not notable in an article about the *serial*. If there is notable information contained in the features, that's something else (if you look at the other serial articles you will note references to commentaries and so on), but the features on a DVD, that's nothing special. So a DVD has special features: why is that notable? The Target novelisation is mentioned, as a release, but there's nothing mentioned about its contents because the contents aren't notable. So sure, mention the DVD release, but the contents are not notable in and of themselves. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 14:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The DVD features on the Survivors page are probably not notable either, and might need to be removed. And no, who produced it is *not* immaterial - see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest and Wikipedia:Notability. That policy exists so to ensure unbiased additions. As the producer, you're hardly in a position to be objective about the notability of your own work. Also, you confuse notability with relevance. It may be *relevant*, but is it *notable*? What's so special about the existence of features on a DVD - you haven't answered that question. You haven't bothered to put forward any explanation or argument about why this needs to be in the article except for some vague notion of "relevancy". In any case, I have referred this to the Wikiproject to see what the others might think. Have a good day. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and the novelisation of City of Death is notable because there isn't an official Target adaptation of that serial. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The work is not, in my opinion, notable enough to merit its own page. However, there is no doubt whatsoever that the existence of a BBC commissioned documentary and/or commentary recording about "Planet of Evil", which (regardless of who produced it) goes into detail of the serial's production and which is therefore packed *full* of 'notable information about the serial', should be properly referenced on the wikipedia page for that serial. For goodness' sake, the wiki page includes countless references to unofficial fan web reviews and synopses. Are you seriously suggesting that it is appropriate for these to be referenced and yet the page should not carry reference to an official BBC documentary about the serial's production?? It's no more "advertising" than the page itself 'advertises' Planet of Evil as a commercial product. And given the exhaustive length of your own wiki profile, I'm not sure your comments about the 'vanity' of a producer daring to include details of his BBC commissioned programme are entirely appropriate. The fact that some films don't include this material is neither here nor there. Some do, some don't. In the context of the Dr Who pages, which include all kinds of references to unofficial reference work and merchandise, you have no grounds whatsoever for your argument. By the way the previosu items on this page aer nothing to do with me - probably someone else posting from my office.--User:86.111.223.190
Oh, please. The user page is not a Wikipedia article and doesn't need to follow Wikipedia policies. Let's not go the ad hominem route here. The Doctor Who pages include references to unofficial references and merchandise, but all in proper context. You're just listing the features, and once again, why is the very existence of a feature on a DVD significant in the context of the story? Why does the producer's name need to be mentioned? You never answer the question, "So what?" It's all about context. As it is, it does read like advertising, since there's nothing there to tell the reader why this information matters. You really should engage with the other editors on this. Who knows, they might agree with you. But so far, the only comment that has surfaced here doesn't.--khaosworks (talk • contribs) 00:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] January 2008

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- pb30<talk> 17:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

[edit] June 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Stagflation, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Stagflation was changed by 86.111.223.190 (u) (t) deleting 11338 characters on 2008-06-08T09:30:49+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 09:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)