User talk:OscarFercho/Archive 1

June 2010

See now you f***ed it again. I did literally 2 hours of thorough research on this film and Man-Thing is a live action film, not a television film, and it was only classed as that in America, after it's initial release, move it please. {(OacarFerecho)} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.108.184 (talk) 09:18, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See before on the talk page of the article, or submit again the theme. And care with your language, see on Wikipedia:Civility or you will be reported.OscarFercho (talk) 14:41, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU. Finally, you moved stamp day for superman now if you'll kindly move the others that need it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.108.184 (talk) 20:15, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar. I appreciate you like you like to keep the page accurate and what not. But, V for Vendetta and The Losers are imprint films, Which someone also stated below me. Also Stamp Day for Superman I will let go but technically doesn't belong in that category. If you really want the page to be accurate please put those two films in the other sextion, don't be stubborn and obnoxious.

Oh and you changed my marvel film alterations too, they are correct and you are making it wrong, I don't know why you think you must be right, but it seems by the talk on you, that everyone disagrees with your opinion so stop man, Christ.
Please verified on the talk page of the lists before do it a sense change; isn't only my point of view, are themes previously discussed.OscarFercho (talk) 00:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong. V for Vendetta and The Losers, do not belong in the live action list of Dc films. They are imprinted heroes from Vertigo, and if you actually read the Wikipedia pages of both those films, you will see the word 'imprint' clearly stated so change it, or don't change it back when someone else does.

It makes no sense to me why you reverted my recent edits to the List of films based on Marvel Comics. You provided no explanation for doing so. Please use the talk page before removing other people's good-faith edits. Information included in each of my edits can be verified by reading the corresponding IMDB pages. This isn't a list of "notable" films, or a list of films with a U.S. release, it is a comprehensive list of all feature films based on Marvel Comics. Therefore, there shouldn't be any disagreement here. If the film happened, then it should be on the list. Edit the notes if you think they can be more concise, but blanking edits to a list of historical events is vandalism and will be treated as such.Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 05:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The Amazing Spider-Man" Pilot (1977, limited theatrical release outside U.S.) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075671/
Spider-Man: The Dragon's Challenge (1979, limited theatrical release outside U.S.) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077328/
Spider-Man Strikes Back (1978, limited theatrical release outside U.S.) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078308/
Red Sonja (1985) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089893/ ( See recent edits to the talk page for justification for inclusion)
The Incredible Hulk (1977 TV movie) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076190/
The Incredible Hulk: Death in the Family (1977 TV movie) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0177457/


I don't understand why your are referring me to the talk page. I EDITED the talk page! I provided a rationale for the inclusion of Red Sonja under the thread that someone else created. And what does GI Joe have to do with anything? I edited the talk page to make the same point you did - the movies are not based on Marvel Comics. We are in agreement on that. I find it incomprehensible that you are telling me to read previous postings when you clearly didn't do so before deleting my edits. Go back and read them now - you'll see that what you wrote on my talk page makes no sense. Please don't make further deletions to this page until you are willing to cross-check information and follow discussions as they evolve. Someone might actually have something interesting to contribute, and be willing to justify their edits.Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 15:17, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JUSTICE LEAGUE MOVIE PAGE

YOU DELETED MY JL MOVIE PAGE!!!! WHY??? I DELETED THE THEORY INFO AND YOU STILL DELETED IT. WHY?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkoPhoenix (talk • contribs) 2014-06-29-09:58:35

Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 02:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of films...

Just thought I should let you know that this edit isn't vandalism. It's in violation of verifiability policy, but it isn't an intentional effort to undermine the encyclopedia, which is what qualifies an edit as vandalism. Cheers! Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 00:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


From:Krazyman1246th Oscar what I was doing was the job you should've been doing adding a confirmed movie to the List of Live action films based on DC comic characters that was named www.batmannews.com is a trusted source and it does what all the other sites do give information. So Oscar check your sources man because you are wrong. Sorry. If you can't do that than you should not be on here doing poor management. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krazyman1246th (talk • contribs) 02:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of films based on Marvel Comics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CGI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:48, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your undoing of edits both recent and previous

You should not be deleting the "in development without release date yet" section. This section has been up for some time and you have also deleted my recent addition of confirmed films being developed. You have also provided no explanation for your actions. This is a public, community page, and as such I'd expect more courtesy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthbefree (talk • contribs) 22:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Thank you for your understanding. The work you've put in is very appreciated. The "In development" section is one of the most interesting tidbits of information. It would be a shame to see that go. I had restored the section because I noticed a great deal of information already put forward (which I now understand you put out) was deleted. I had only looked to add to the information. I'm glad I could contribute. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthbefree (talk • contribs) 04:59, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Box Office

Box Office Mojo is the primary source for the box office but it's not the most reliable, BoxOffice.com is more reliable as I was told on here, and it's not only what I consider.JoseCamachoJr (talk) 19:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If is not only that you consider, please wait to a consensous respect the cited source.OscarFercho (talk) 01:30, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Fountain (2006) Vertigo Comic

Look, I get that you spend a good deal of time policing these pages. But you cannot rewrite history, or substitute reality with your opinions. The Fountain existed as a comic book before the film, at a time when a film was believed by Darren Aronofsky to be an impossibility. The publication date is before the start date of the film. If you were simply ignorant if this than it is a simple mistake and I'm sure you want to educate yourself, but if you're being willfully ignorant and stubborn because you don't want anyone else to contribute to the page that is grossly unreasonable. Please, I don't want to fight, but you have a responsibility to people to present the reality as simply that; reality. You can not warp in for your own purposes. Facts are facts. Do a little research before you go reverting every edit. Thank you.

and in case you missed it, in response to your "The Fountain is not based on a comic"

It absolutely is. It's inarguable. If Stardust is to be considered a film based on a Vertigo comic (who's copyright is retained by author Neil Gaiman which he immediately exercised to publish a full novel based on the "graphic storybook" which IS NOT A COMIC and later sold the film rights to Paramount Pictures for) then The Fountain (merely a film concept by creator Darren Aronovsky, which he reworked as a graphic novel when he had difficulty getting the film's production kicked off) published by Vertigo months before the film was greenlit and a full year before it's release, should logically be included. Aronofsky resigned to the comic format under the pretense that his film vision would never see the light of day, and had he been right, these 10 years later, it'd be just another forgotten Vertigo one shot. If you remove the Fountain from this list without good reason, then Stardust should be removed too. Opinions don't enter into it, only facts. Again, the comic existed in completed and released form before the film even began, at a time when the creator himself believed the comic to be the only way the story would ever see the light of day. 


— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.1.170.101 (talk) 03:02, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This theme was previously discussed, The Fountain comic was based on the original script, the movie is not based on a comic, that's the rule of the list. If you want propose its inclusion again, please submit on the talk page of the list, cause it's not my own opinion.OscarFercho (talk) 03:19, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I have done so, hopefully this erroneous categorization will be corrected — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.1.170.101 (talk) 19:49, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But, please wait for a consensous before remove any film of the list.OscarFercho (talk) 01:03, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain...

...this revert? The source is dated as of Dec 24, 2015... that's only 4 weeks old, yet you say it's "outdated"? And there are no other sources indicating that what is reported there has changed. Wikipedia goes by what the sources say. Unless you can provide other sources to contravene this one, you'll have to revert yourself and put the edit back. - theWOLFchild 07:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually...never mind. It appears you're offline now. I have found additional sources and re-added the info with them. I would still like an explanation for the revert when you're back, so I'll watch your talk page for it. - theWOLFchild 07:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what's the source of those sources? There's no any announcement of Lucasfilm about the specific release date of the Episode IX, only that will be on 2019, same case of Boba Fett film, there's no formal confirmation of the company.OscarFercho (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to challenge the source, then instead of reverting, go to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard (WP:RSN) and post your concern there. If the source(s) is/are considered not reliable, then you can remove them from the article. Many sources have already been vetted there and you may find your concern is either legit or unfounded. You can't just remove content because you 'don't like' a source. Even if a source is not sufficient, it is sometimes preferable to leave the info in the article with a [citation needed] tag, to encourage others to find better sources. - theWOLFchild 19:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that "I like me", It's for not reliable sources. But I take, I will use on the future the [citation needed] tag.OscarFercho (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

41nd is not a valid ordinal

Your reversion here is ridiculous; 41nd is not a valid ordinal. Double check your work before making changes, and don't restore problematic content, please. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion

As you have spoken against the Marvel Super Hero Adventures: Frost Fight on the talk page for List of films based on Marvel Comics, I am inviting you to take part in this Article for Deletion here --Rtkat3 (talk) 14:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Batman reboot

I'm fine with the edit you made to Batman in film, but I wanted to let you know that it technically is a reboot. It doesn't have to be an origin story to be a reboot. It just has to be a re-start of the Batman franchise in a new universe with a new cast (which it is). That's why Spider-Man: Homecoming is considered a reboot of a reboot of the Spider-Man franchise, even though it isn't an origin story.

The film would only have to be an origin story if it were a remake of Batman Begins (which it isn't). The difference between a remake and a reboot is that a remake restarts the franchise by retelling the same story of the original (such as Halloween, Psycho, A Nightmare On Elm Street, ETC). A reboot restarts the franchise, but with a new story (such as Dredd, Batman Begins, Friday the 13th, ETC). However, the terms "reboot" and "remake" are sometimes used interchangeably. DarkKnight2149 02:29, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. but I'm disagree, I think that a reboot it's, essentially, a retelling history, that's no the case of the last iteration of Batman, but fine, I believe that Batman of DCEU must be not considered a reboot version.OscarFercho (talk) 02:47, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we can agree to disagree. Besides, if there's ever a conflicting edit, we can always create a consensus at the Wikiproject. DarkKnight2149 15:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is.OscarFercho (talk) 15:35, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the user's personal opinion/definition of what a reboot is - the DCEU version of Batman is indeed a rebooted version of the character. Simple as that.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:08, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This question is in the past, I don't know what problem now.OscarFercho (talk) 06:13, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Simply commenting on other threads, where you have exhibited similar behavior. You opinions do not change factual information, User:OscarFercho. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 14:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, OscarFercho. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Mummy (franchise), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Newell. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:29, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel's New Warriors

You are invited to join the discussion, on the MCU TV Series Talk Page, regarding whether the show Marvel's New Warriors has been confirmed as being MCU or not. The discussion is currently largely about the executive's quote in response to the "Marvel likes to say that "everything is connected"... interview question in the following Hollywood Reporter article. [1]. Please share your thoughts if you wish. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 22:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

A request to change the title and content of a comics article has begun at Talk:X-Men (film series)#Requested move 7 April 2017. Any interested WikiProject:Comics editor may comment there within one week. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:51, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And here, Black Kite Tenebrae is tainting and invalidating his own RfC movement by Wp:CANVASSing to users who are not A)Doing so in a central location (i.e. the RfC list, though it is there) B)Notifying editors that are not mentioned in nor involved in the discussion prior to his notices, and C)By Spamming.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Big Hero 6 the animated feature film is owned by Walt Disney Animation Studios

I need you to be aware of this. Big Hero 6 the animated movie has no affiliation with Marvel. No Marvel subsidiaries were involved with the production of the feature film. If you look at the production and distribution of the movie, it's by Walt Disney Animation Studios and Walt Disney Pictures. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 13:54, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Colin Trevorrow

It was announced over a month ago that he was no longer writing Episode 9. Jack Thorne was brought in to re-write the script and this is one of the things that led to his departure. "According to the Hollywood Reporter, Kennedy and Trevorrow were divided over script issues and writer Jack Thorne ("Wonder") had recently been hired to work on the story." I cant imagine with him being fired they will go with his script as they already had brought in Thorne. http://collider.com/star-wars-9-new-writer-jack-thorne/

Jason1978 (talk) 09:10, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Venom

In response to your question, I removed the reference from Venom's pre-production because it is not connected to Spider-Man: Homecoming nor the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Cineplex (talk) 9:17PM, September 28, 2017

So then, We need a better reference, but the preproduction has started.OscarFercho (talk)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, OscarFercho. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The exorcist in List of highest-grossing films

Hi. Do you know why The_Exorcist_(film) is not on this section? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#Timeline_of_highest-grossing_films. Greetings from Chile --Jbaranao (talk) 23:50, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming DC films

Are you sure it was OK to remove the upcoming films from List of films based on DC Comics? Admittedly, if they were to be kept, the list was still incomplete, but I was going to add the other films. My plan was this: I'd like to add all upcoming films to the DC list, properly referenced.

When you reverted my edits, you even removed a few 2020 films that I had added in the list too.

List of Walt Disney Pictures films has quite a lot of upcoming films at the end of the list, with references, with and without release dates. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 15:04, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please, use the talk page of the List. It's just wait, for now, any upgrade of the slate of Warner.OscarFercho (talk) 15:08, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, admittedly, I didn't check the talk page before adding the films and I apologize if this caused any problems. Alright, I'll use the talk page for further comments. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 15:31, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You repeatedly revert edits regarding John Francis Daley & Jonathan Goldstein as directors of Flashpoint. The sources provided state that they are in negotiations to direct the film. This means a contractual obligation/relationship with the studio has begun. That means they are hired. Your 'over and over again' and 'they are in talks' nonsense has no validity. "In talks" is a slang/fan-boy term that basically means rumors or consideration. That's incorrect on all accounts. The filmmakers confirmed their role on their social media page. There is no reason to revert those edits.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 08:19, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The report cited from Vatiety, it's about talks, negotiations, the same like John Francis Daley cited. They are not contracted yet.OscarFercho (talk) 13:43, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:OscarFercho, you are directly and purposefully WP:WARring with User:DisneyMetalhead. The latter has cited a source multiple times that includes the director acknowledging their involvement in the project. You are nitpicking by stating that anything else is required and by reverting the edits repetitively. With the director acknowledging/confirming the attachment to the film - what else is needed?! The source is valid enough. --206.81.136.61 (talk) 01:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:OscarFercho as the previous editor pointed out you are edit warring... when there is enough evidence that is reliable for edits --- why do you continuously revert these edits? If you honestly need something more than the director confirming his involvement, then there will be a source stating the studio's confirmation added when it is stated. However, when it comes directly from one of the co-directors, I don't see the issue.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 03:01, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yeah, and where's the directors confirmation of their involvement? Negotiations are not the same as an officila attachement.OscarFercho (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:OscarFercho - You continue to edit war on this page. Even your response to my previous comment^ is combative. Doing so is against Wikipedia regulations. You need to discuss edits that are in conflict with sources and/or the general consensus of other editors. You reverted an edit done earlier even though the two sources were reliable, only to finally read one and decide that one source is "reliable". You do not WP:OWN this page nor any other page. Be collaborative, and understand that there are multiple sources that are classified as reliable when doing edits to pages on Wikipedia. I'm glad you finally agree with the sources that state who the directors of Flashpoint are.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 14:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It appears as though this is common among your edits as seen here. Other editors are trying to help you in your edits, by keeping Wikipedia clean and consistent. As User:TheWolfChild pointed out, you cannot delete sources and edits just because you believe they are unreliable. It's against Wikipedia policy. Take to discussion boards and talk pages when you disagree.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 14:39, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not here for glad to anyone.OscarFercho (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:OscarFercho, you continue to flippantly delete information and references, while you never provide sources for your edits. If you're going to edit a paragraph namely this one, please do so with complete and proper English as this is an Encyclopedia and needs to be correct. Secondly - stop deleting confirmed information. You did so here. If you continue this behavior, this will be brought to the attention of admins, in order to protect the page. Please be collaborative and discuss your arguments on Talk:DC Extended Universe before you delete or add anything else to this page. --DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:52, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Greg Berlanti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stargirl (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) 09:18, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Iron Warrior

Sorry about the whole "unreliable source" thing on the list of television series based on Marvel Comics. Do you want me to put the X-Force series back but without the source? I don't want to be untrustworthy. --The Iron Warrior (talk) 01:25, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use the talk page of the List, please.OscarFercho (talk) 03:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DCEU page

I undid the revision again because the way it was says all films in the chart are in the DCEU unless otherwise specified, and none of the non-DCEU films specify that they aren't, which would imply that things like the original Superman and batman films are in the DCEU....which is incorrect. If you want the format with the comment above the chart to be accurate, you would need to go to each section and add 'not in DCEU' for every movie prior to Man of Steel. That's fine, but without doing that it's stating all of the films are in the DCEU. Please see talk page on the DCEU live action film page for more on this. Thank you. --Stevehim (talk) 21:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, OscarFercho. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of edit to List of films based on Marvel Comics‎‎

I noticed that you reverted my changes to this page. I think that the organizational structure that I proposed is sensible, so let me explain why. First, the page as you would prefer it is not parallel between the live-action and animated sections. There is a section for theatrically released films within the section for animated films, but no such section heading for live-action films. If you look at the table of contents, live-action television films have their own first-level section heading, but animated television films are combined with direct-to-video films as a second-level heading in the animation section. This is confusing that the level of headings switches around based on whether the film is live-action or animated. Second, you seemed to take issue with separating films released in the U.S. from those that were only released elsewhere or not released at all. There is a very sensible reason for doing this. All of these films were produced by companies in the United States and therefore would be expected to receive a U.S. release. In the United States, a domestic release is considered one where the film is shown in North America, which almost always means the United States and possibly Canada. Films produced in the United States that do no receive a domestic release, but are shown in a small list of other countries, are seen as being "dumped" without the confidence of the studio behind it. These films have more in common with direct-to-video films than they do with films that received a domestic theatrical release. I see you linked to a thread where the issue of separating these films was discussed before, and noticed that you were initially in favor of separation. Only three other reviewers besides yourself participated when this was brought up five years ago, which hardly seems like overwhelming support, particularly since this list has gotten considerably longer since then. If the issue is that people keep adding in films that only received an international release, then these entries can be left in the list with code so it doesn't display along with a note that the film appears elsewhere on the page. I am in favor of restoring my edits and letting people who don't want separate sections for those live-action films raise the issue again on the talk page explaining why it is better to collapse across these sections. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You. Better is a new sumbmit and discussion for to know a real current consensous.OscarFercho (talk) 02:18, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Is important to consider that the sections exist for how many films there are, and its exposure, not just reflects same sections of another lists. That, and Northamerica it's not all the wolrd, its a primary market, but not the only one, that's couldn't be a parameter.OscarFercho (talk) 02:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Spider-Man: Far From Home

Hey Oscar Fercho,

There is a discussion taking place at Talk:Spider-Man: Far From Home where some wiki editors are debating whether to change the film's title to 'Far from Home' instead of its current title 'Far From Home' (lowercase the second f). I opposed this, but there are many who support this change. Would you like to add your two cents to the discussion? Cardei012597 (talk) 19:01, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of television series and films based on Image Comics publications

Can you help me to edit a page title List of television series and films based on Image Comics publications please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackknight1234567890 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of television series and films based on Image Comics publications

Can you help me to edit a page title List of television series and films based on Image Comics publications — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackknight1234567890 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i have a problem

Can you help to edit List of television series based on Marvel Comics please. Blackknight1234567890 (talk) 15:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what yo need?OscarFercho (talk) 00:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at List of television series based on DC Comics publications

Hi OscarFercho,

please take a moment to have a look at the edit warring policy again.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!! Kr.OscarFercho (talk) 02:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]