|
User talk:Barry Wom/Archive 1
The photo of the silver tabby Maine Coon that you provided is beautiful. I actually never knew that such a color existed in the breed, let alone in the cat world. Thank you for finding it and putting it into the Maine Coon article! – Ms. Sarita Confer 10:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC) Thank you for keeping an eye on the Maine Coon article. Between two jobs, part-time school, and a full-time boyfriend, I have not had ANY time to come in and keep an eye on it. So, thank you! – Ms. Sarita Confer 20:48, 23 August 2011 (UTC) 70mm filmsOk, sorry to add irrelevant stuff to List of 70 mm films; I was wikifying Around the World (1967 film) and wanted to make sure it didn't get lost if it belonged. Nice of you to tell me. :) Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC) February 2011
The Citation Barnstar
Re. Pat Tillman, and the quotation/censorship debate, In order to clarify, I am asking users to briefly, clearly state which version of the quotation they support or oppose. Please see Talk:Pat_Tillman#Clarifying_for_consensus I am sending this message to everyone who has previously participated in the discussion; I do not wish to make any assumptions of the previous opinion. I want to show clear consensus, so the issue can be resolved and edit-warring can be prevented. Thanks, Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Chzz (talk) at 00:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC). MI 4WP:FILMRELEASE says, "Release dates should be restricted to the film's earliest release, whether it was at a film festival or a public release, and the release date(s) in the country or countries that produced the film". For your kind information, the film was also produced in India. -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Protip
List of 3D filmsFirst of all thanks for appreciating my work on the article. :) Perhaps you could also vote against merging of the 2 lists: Talk:List_of_3D_films_till_2004. --Fluffystar (talk) 11:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
April 2012
3RR warningYour 13:16, 8 June 2012 revert at The Avengers (2012 film) was your third revert of on that page today. One more and you will have violated WP:3RR. This is the required warning. I have been a discussion on the talk page, which will be noted in an 3RR report and which I invited you to join. --Tenebrae (talk) 13:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC) Photo usageHi, I'm working an an educational videogame with which I'm trying to build a bridge between animal awareness and Pokemon fans among others. It started out as something small but it's getting bigger and more professional. I saw one of your pictures: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MaineCoonSilverTabby.jpg And I would like your permission to use it under that license with the following attribution: Barry Wom Also, because I want to make sure there's no misunderstanding, you are the original photographer correct? It sometimes happens that another person simply takes a picture from somebody else and uploads it to wikipedia with a license to distribute. That is why I'm asking. There is more information on the game here, including a short video that tells a little bit about the background: https://www.redacted.com/projects/238178285/animalalbum I also have a demo version of the game available so you can see for yourself in what way the pictures are presented: http://dromedarydreams.com/index/demo/0-8 Please let me know if I have your permission, if the picture is yours and if you want a different attribution. With kind regards, Sjors Jansen (all.animalalbum@gmail.com) Garfunkel Jansen (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC) Sorry for The List of IMAX DMR filmsMr.Barry Wom I'm sorry for the List of IMAX DMR films page. Hal95kuro (talk) 22:16, 19 March 2018 (JST) Pirates 5 BudgetThe budget of Pirates 5 is only $230 milion, no $320 milion Jerry Bruchkeimer (talk) 19:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for July 25Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Staines–Windsor line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metropolitan Water Board (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:23, 25 July 2018 (UTC) Request for comments on the removal of digital DMR titlesNotice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harris Seldon (talk • contribs) 10:40, 11 September 2018 (UTC) Tutankhamun Page Vandalism & Editing Disruption AccusationBarry you have accused me of vandalism of the Tutankhamun page and threatened to ban me from editing. This is an unfair accusation. I have given sufficient argumentation for updating the Tutankhamun page image. Wikipedia does not say anywhere in any rules that the most famous image should be the wikipedia page image. The page image should be the image that is the best depiction of the person. Wikimedia Commons has a great image of his mannequin, which is a fully painted depiction of him. I linked the mannequin image to his page because it better represents his appearance than his gold mask.SmoovOpr8r (talk) 15:53, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Rollback granted Hi Barry Wom. After reviewing your request, I have rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:
For some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:08, 3 August 2021 (UTC) Bob Geldof at Rebellion 2015If the mention of national headlines were removed, then Geldof's onstage remarks would at least be verifiable content in themselves. The trouble with verifying the headlines, as with any wave of tabloid-related notoriety, is that since the headlines themselves appeared in banned sources such as [1] therefore the only means of verifying the existence of the headlines would be for a reliable source (such as a broadsheet newspaper) to comment on the tabloid coverage (as opposed to directly covering the story - which they might still do but in a more low-key fashion not constituting headline coverage in its own right). Highbrow roundups of tabloid ravings are sadly rare and hard to trace (Punch used to do a good such section back in the day.) Romomusicfan (talk) 17:49, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Ignore and warnYou are violating WP:BRD. You should read the article you mentioned again. There is a talk page discussion that explains this issue further. You should also learn what WP:STATUSQUO is. ภץאคгöร 18:22, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
American Dad! (season 18)User:223.165.105.133 is disruptive editing again. Xeditboy (talk) 03:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 14Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited South ParQ Vaccination Special, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBR. 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) 05:55, 14 September 2021 (UTC) South ParkI’d like to extend a formal apology for recent edits. While I have been editing and contributing to what I felt was towards the consensus, I realize that it is not what others see and has resulted in a back and forth between other editors and myself. I’ve decided to refrain towards major edits towards the South Park related articles until a final decision be made on the film series page, and even then I will be doing my best to abide by the consensus in a more direct way. One again, my apologies for any trouble or hassle over the past few days. Zvig47 (talk) 03:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC) Types of chocolateWikipedia editors are supposed to assume good faith (at all times), this is something our civil society thrives on and so do I, but apparently not yourself. This article is a mix between general information, international law and technical knowledge. Why you insist on UK and EU unity is beyond me, their laws are distinct and the directive you so kindly found does not any longer include the UK, legally. It says "Addressee: The fifteen Member States: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, United Kingdom" so keep your edit, if you were focused on "Good Faith" or if you assumed it, you would have edited it to make it ring true or be an authoritative section. EU laws simply no longer apply to any members of the Commonwealth of Nations. Right now the way it stands people doing research will be forced to closely examine the law to decide if they are in the UK or in the EU which laws apply to them. France, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Italy, Spain and the UK all have their own laws and regulations regarding chocolate as well as exceed the directive you so kindly found which I did not. So thanks for finding that, just keep your roll-back reversion, leave people without additional information and be extra happy with your great accomplishment of doing nothing except wasting my time and effort trying to collaborate at Wikipedia as a volunteer. Arbitrators are not judges, they are mediators their opinions force the entities to come to a resolution, you did neither and pulled a Donald Trump move with no apparent benefit to anyone except your own ego. Problemsmith (talk) 16:11, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages! Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by casualdejekyll 17:18, 14 February 2022 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template. Your thread has been archived
3D films listThe reason why I reverted your edits is because they completely destroyed the bottom part of the article, with references and such. Please make sure you preview the whole page before making changes. --Caciulacdlac (talk) 16:51, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
That Wasn't Unsourced Changes On First UnionWachovia Actually Bought First Union It was not the Other Way Around So can you please revert that 107.77.224.86 (talk) 16:27, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Removing storyboard editsWhy did you remove my storyboard edits for multiple shows (such as Futurama, American Dad, The Cleveland Show, even children's shows like Ben 10)? I worked very hard to improve those pages but now since you removed them, the writers and directors (specifically co-directors or co-writers) are a bit of a jumbled mess. I already the discussions that storyboard artists are only allowed for children's shows (Nick, CN, Disney) but why you are removing the storyboards from almost all adult/primetime shows? I know they were credited in the credits and only the writer and director were credited in the opening titles, but why you are taking away my hard work on adding the storyboard artists. I promise I will not add composers, overseas studios, supervising directors, etc. because it can overclog the page and it will become unreadble. Most people can only find the storyboard artists on IMDB but the problem with that is that it is always vandalized. Take a look on the SpongeBob episodes "Squirrel Jelly/The String" (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8260950/?ref_=fn_ep_tt_1) and "Plankton's Intern/Patrick's Tantrum" (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10084374/?ref_=fn_ep_tt_1). Even if the writers and voice actors were correct, the animation department section was totally vandalized. They claim that the crew from The Simpsons Movie and The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie have involvement in these episodes but that's is not true! How Rich Moore, Gregg Vanzo, Steven Dean Moore and Lauren MacMullan are involved in these episodes?! They didn't even work on SpongeBob, they worked on The Simpsons! But you see, IMDB is not always a reliable source. Can you please restore all of my storyboard edits for most of the shows I mentioned (same applies to The Simpsons and Family Guy)? I worked so hard on adding those pages, but you are taking it all away! Thank you. 69.255.225.138 (talk) 16:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Reverted edit: prequelHello Barry. I saw you reverted my edit. You are right, I was hasty. I keep reading on the web (the last two times, yesterday on Wikipedia and right now on another site) people that use "prequel" as if it means "prologue" or "precursor" or "previous episode". I just wanted to emphasize the fact that a prequel has to be released AFTER the original. Do you see my point? Shall we work together towards a reformulation that makes that apparent even to the "hasty-reader-who-stops-after-less-than-one-line"? --Abacos (talk) 22:04, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
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 Hi Barry I don’t mean to argue or get in a editing war but I feel my sources are accurate. On the dark knights page it uses similar ones and people seem to find them ok. Could we maybe find a third person to rule on this ? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaszen (talk • contribs) 18:30, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Green Eggs and Ham Tv SeriesIf you check the edit history of the page, you will see that up till when Anonymous user 2607:FEA8:AA42:EB00:A87B:17DF:B91B:D024 made an edit, the dates were released at the same time. Hence they provide no proof on the dates needed to be change. 97.125.165.179 (talk) 19:07, 23 December 2022 (UTC) Potter SchweppesThe citation is the link to the Stephen Potter article itself, where the Schweppes thing is clearly mentioned. The Potter/Schweppes connection is very well known and requires no special reference beyone that. - Metalello talk 15:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Candyfloss (Loefah remix)The Knowledge (Untold remix) Epigrammed (talk) 18:55, 7 February 2023 (UTC) You are going to pay! Don't touch that Wikipedia!!!! Do not edit it, do not block it or you are grounded forever!!!!! It's not vandalism, you fool! You are terrible man!!!!! You're gonna feel sorry!!!!! This is my life!!!!! Okay????? Forget about Wikipedia!!!!!!! Forget it!!!!!! I'm super serious!!!!! I mean it!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.67.12.121 (talk) 09:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Cadbury Creme EggWhy did you revert my edit to Cadbury Creme Egg without leaving me a message on my talk page? 2600:6C52:4C40:E77:A835:C774:B81B:925A (talk) 02:17, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Why?why did you remove what i had put that has to do in the plot of monty python and the holy grail!? the animator was Terry Gilliam himself but with a joke he had a heart attack making the monster of the cave no longer exists, it's monty python. LeronJomes (talk) 15:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
April 2023 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 05:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Yes, I know you were in the right policywise ... the source CMJ2 kept providing was not reliable. But that's only an exception to 3RR when it involves a BLP. It takes two to edit war, and unfortunately you were the other person (I haven't blocked you for as long). You could have explained it in detail on their talk page instead of continuing to revert, or requested protection. Daniel Case (talk) 05:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Incorrect comma in Morgana Robinson articleHi. Your edit is fine; but, just to be clear, the reason I'd removed that comma was that it is incorrect to precede a restrictive appositive with a comma. Moreover, a comma before an appositive, even where that's correct (i.e., with a nonrestrictive appositive), would need to be paired with a second comma after the appositive. People often add gratuitous commas before titles of books, movies, albums, TV shows, etc., perhaps because they make an erroneous analogy with the correct practice of putting a comma before a quotation (i.e., an actual quotation, not a short-story or song title with its conventional quotation marks, which do not automatically call for introductory commas). In any event, your edit stands, but I wanted to explain why that comma was indeed incorrect in the version I addressed. Jcejhay (talk) 13:20, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Astros-Cardinals RivalryI have some links that showed the significance of the rivalry. If I add these links to these articles, will that be enough of a citation to keep the articles? https://www.seattlepi.com/sports/astros/article/Old-rivals-Astros-Cardinals-face-off-with-new-8108239.php https://www.overtimeheroics.net/2022/03/25/top-five-astros-rivalries/ Thepatrick01 (talk) 21:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Although she has some non-white ancestry, Demetria seems like a common name in English-speaking nations. How is Demi not an obvious diminutive of it? Not as distinct as Bob from Robert or Becky from Rebecca? Kailash29792 (talk) 13:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I saw that you reverted my edit. The reason for the edit is IMAX GT 3D LASER because I saw the description for IMAX GT 3D LASER in the contract. It is not an unfounded addition.ArvinTing (talk) 06:33, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
My editsHey, what's your problem?, why are you constantly harassing me and why do you keep on looking at what I do and don't do here on Wikipedia? Leave me alone. Guys like you are like Lope de Vega's story The dog in the manger; you don't eat but you don't let them eat either. I reiterate, LEAVE ME ALONE. I am not doing anything to you and your attitude leaves much to be desired. JeanCastì (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Skull Island is produced by Warner Bros. AnimationSkull Island is produced by Warner Bros. Animation, dude!!!! 187.255.222.128 (talk) 16:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Kingsman: The Golden CircleHow do you know that Kingsman: The Golden Circle is based off a story in the comics? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScratJitZu (talk • contribs) 21:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Made more posts on the talk page for the film.go read it and stop refusing to acknowledge the things I've pointed out. 72.135.248.71 (talk) 15:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Why were my changes to Prometheus (2012 film) reverted?I had described the deaths of 2 individuals (Millburn and Fifield) starring in Prometheus. The changes were instantly reverted. May I know why? AlAzhar 14:38, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer granted Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages. Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. See also:
Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC) You!Why did you revert my edit? 2600:4040:9B07:AD00:2D81:14E7:12A3:73B6 (talk) 22:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC) There was no justification.If the edits cannot be used because it's a quote unquote "sockpuppet edit" Then why are the "Megamind memes dominate the internet" and the "Ahead of its time" sources allowed but the extended and objectively better version isn't? I'm the one who put both the "memes dominate the internet 12 years after the release." And "ahead of its time" sources there in the first place. So why are you allowing those but not the other one? 2603:6000:B800:EB4:D508:179B:1BEF:736E (talk) 03:59, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Copying/moving text within Wikipedia requires attribution
Movie Billing BlockLook, when it comes to films that haven't come out yet, then yes. We can use the poster and/or the website of the film. HOWEVER, when a film comes out, that is when we have to use the single screen billing block in either the opening credits or the ending credits, because it's a part of the movie itself and not promotional material. 173.53.35.177 (talk) 02:52, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
2001: A Space OdysseyAnd who are you to decide whether it is worth mentioning or not? AMCKen (talk) 19:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters - revision undone due to limit of 700 words exceededHi Barry, Looking at the text of your undo message: Undid revision 1197096256 by Szagory (talk) Unfortunately the plot additions break the upper word count limit of 700. Please reword to stay below this. I'm just curious where that limit of 700 words comes from - and since what time is it in effect? I've never heard about anything like that... Also, under what circumstances is that limit supposed to be enforced, does it apply to every single edit (in which it would be conceivably very easy to break, when new material is added to previously empty section)? Szagory (talk) 11:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Regarding edit to Over The Hedge plot summaryHi, I noticed that you reverted my edit to the plot summary of Over the Hedge (film) with the edit summary "The plot needs trimming, not added to." I agree that the plot could be trimmed, but the small amount I added was a sentence explaining the core conflict of the film, which was a very necessary addition. I also made some necessary changes to improve cohesion that didn't effect the length, please be cognizant of reverting entire edits due to an objection with just one element of the edit. I'm writing you here with an explanation because I don't want to start an edit war, but for now I will be undoing your undo due to the importance of the line I added. I will also try to pare down the summary a bit as a good will gesture. I hope this addresses your concerns over the length of the plot summary. pluma♫ ♯ 21:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Argylle posterHey. You might want to discuss Talk:Argylle#Billing_block -- 109.79.74.142 (talk) 19:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC) IMAX GT at Puente Hills MallHey, I'm not a Wiki person but I frequent that location and can vouch it's been upgraded to GT aka Dual-Laser on a 1.9:0 canvas. 47.147.230.147 (talk) 18:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing Warner Bros. Pictures for a period of one week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC) Barry Wom (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Oh go on then, I'll submit an appeal. Not out of any particular desire to edit the Warner Bros. Pictures article within the next week, just to make a couple of points. Firstly, mea culpa. I did indeed perform three reverts in 24 hours and five within 48 hours. As a glance at my user contributions will show, 90% of my time on Wikipedia is spent patrolling for disruptive editing. On reverting, I'll normally check the other edits made by the disruptive user, revert any troublesome ones and leave a talk page warning if necessary. In my experience, in the vast majority of cases (particularly where an IP user is involved) the disruptive editor doesn't return. In this particular instance this obviously didn't happen. When I checked the user's talk page I spotted that they had been warned for edit warning three days previously, indicating that this was obviously someone with a very recent history of disruption. The note from the admin at the 3RR noticeboard states "This was an issue that could have been resolved through discussion." I'm firmly of the belief that attempting to discuss the insertion of this material would have been fruitless. In any case, the reason for my reversions was included in my edit summaries: Contrast with the IP's edit summaries, when they even bothered to provide one: Does this sound like someone who would have engaged in discussion? And what could I add to a talk page discussion other than "this edit is poorly worded", i.e. parroting what I'd already pointed out in the edit summaries? At least one established editor agreed that this IP was being disruptive in this particular case [2]. Finally, while I do realise that the disputed content is largely irrelevant in 3RR cases, did any admin check out what this user was actually inserting (and which, of course, remains on the current version)? Have a game of grammatical error bingo.
I've seen enough block appeals to know that I now need to do a contrite summary of "what have I learned?" and "what I would do differently in the future?". I've certainly learned to be much more wary of submitting a 3RR report without triple checking that I've not fallen foul of the rule myself. That was an idiotic move that I won't be repeating again. In retrospect, instead of reporting 3RR I should have requested semi-protection on the article, which would almost certainly have been implemented. That way we wouldn't have the current situation where a badly worded edit is allowed to stand. For another week, at least. Barry Wom (talk) 11:28, 15 February 2024 (UTC) Decline reason: As noted below, this not exactly a persuasive request. A partial block from one article is not a big deal. You can establish consensus on the talk page for your preferred version. PhilKnight (talk) 14:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
I'd appreciate if you'd take a look at Transformers: The Last Knight. I notice in your previous edits on that article you have also tried to cut back the bloat and make sure the WP:LEAD section summarizes succinctly. I have attempted to reduce the paragraph long premise summary in the lead section down to just one sentence.(diff) I'd appreciate a second opinion, but I really don't think very much detail is needed in the lead. -- 109.255.172.169 (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look. Personally I feel it is redundant to write "In the film," (where else would we be talking about) and I fear that having the premise in a separate paragraph will only encourage the type of person who will bloat it back up again (not that they need much encouragement), but I will check back again in a few months and see how it goes. Not having seen the film is better actually, the single line of premise in the lead section should more or less make sense with little or no prior knowledge (you know like in an encyclopedia). The lead section shouldn't be inflicting trivia like "the order of the Wittwicans" on normal readers.[3] The film itself is spectacularly bad, it is a bad film and a spectacular noisy mess full of Bayhem.. If you've seen film 2, 3, or 4, you should be able to guess what film 5 TLK is like, and it is more absurd than that even. -- 109.255.172.169 (talk) 14:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to join New pages patrol Hello Barry Wom!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC) Please review it as a edit.Ok look I know I was objectively wrong beforehand trying to force sources onto the article that couldn't be used but trust me this time there's nothing wrong with anything on the edit. Please do not take it off. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Please do not block me,This is the Wikipedia page, I always edit this one. It should be used to fix stuff, not to disrupt edit., by the way it’s a holiday. Exteahans71 (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
|
