User talk:198.23.5.11

Attention: Last edited: Last edited by: 14:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC) 198.23.5.11 (talk · contribs) This IP address, 198.23.5.11, is registered to Verizon Data Services LLC. In the event of persistent vandalism from this address, efforts may be made to contact them to report abuse. Contact information may be available in the WHOIS report. If you are editing from this IP address and are frustrated by irrelevant messages, you can avoid them by creating an account for yourself. Sometimes, in response to vandalism, you may be temporarily unable to create an account. If you are an unregistered user operating from this address, note that it may be possible for the owner of the IP to determine who was making contributions from this address at any given time. If you are the owner of this address responding to reports of inappropriate conduct from this address, you may find the contributions history and block log for this address helpful. Please feel free to contact any administrator who has blocked this address with questions (blocking admins will be listed in the block log).

"FiOS no longer carrying WUTB-TV on chan. 9. Currently has a slate." Is there a carriage dispute? Mvcg66b3r (talk) 00:06, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Aboideau. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Bill de Blasio have been undone because they 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. aboideau^talk 17:38, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they 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 Teahouse. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 23:03, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Love at First Bite (1950 film), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Of Cash and Hash. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this film dozens of times and I know what's in it.Please accept the word of a movie buff.This is a new joke that is not in SHIVERING SHERLOCKS. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 20:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not accept original research. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 20:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Inherit the Wind (1960 film). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 15:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Chic Johnson, you may be blocked from editing. Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 17:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is this "vandalism"crap!! I am citing FACTS!! These thin gs re TRUE!!

You have a peculiar definition of "vandalism"

I added INHERIT THE WIND because it doesn't have a WIKIPEDIA QUOTE section,which it definitely should. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Film articles don't typically include quotation sections, especially not in the formatting you were using while adding them. I would recommend becoming more familiar with the conventions we use in our articles before making these kinds of edits. DonIago (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Rube Waddell. Next time add a citation into the article. Peaceray (talk) 23:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at And Then There Were None (1945 film). Peaceray (talk) 23:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to a project page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Silent films task force. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an project and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the project page's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same page will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an project page, you should limit your discussion to improving the project. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Peaceray (talk) 23:59, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm -Alabama-. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. -Alabama- (talk) 17:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Ghost Ship (1952 film). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Yoshi24517 ^Chat _Online 19:54, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Kid Norfolk. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Yoshi24517 ^Chat _Online 19:54, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Breakfast in Hollywood (film). Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. _signed, Willondon (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have the DVD of this film and I know darned well what's in it.Don't give me that UNVERIFiABLe bushwa 198.23.5.11 (talk) 18:47, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this may seem wrong to you, but the way Wikipedia works, you need sources to verify things. That you have seen the movie means nothing. Please read Wikipedia:No original research; your edit on Whispering Ghosts [1] is a perfect example of that. Keep in mind, Wikipedia doesn't just use sources to verify facts, which are often trivial to verify, it also uses secondary sources to indicate notability. Not everything that can be verified belongs in an encyclopedia. You can also stop adding "I have seen this film" to your edit summaries. It means nothing here. _signed, Willondon (talk) 19:53, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,who ELSE has seen the film.Judging by that single sentence,it's me or nobody.And I have VERY good memory. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Whispering Ghosts. Iliad17 (talk) 19:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:16, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't added anyhing since our last conversation.Please check and see if I've been blocked for somebody else's contribution.

My ID has changed 3 times since I logged on to Wikipedia. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm 0xDeadbeef. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to The Bohemian Girl (1936 film)—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. 0xDeadbeef 12:16, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I belong to SONS OF THE DESRT Fanclub.If I say something about Laurel&Hardy is so,it is so. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 12:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source as you did at Whispering Ghosts. _signed, Willondon (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Larry Adler. 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. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ButterCashier. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Harold L. Ickes, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ButterCashier (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Robert R. McCormick, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ButterCashier (talk) 13:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Harold L. Ickes, you may be blocked from editing. ButterCashier (talk) 14:15, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned my source for the Ickes remark--Irving Stone's THEY ALSO RAN(1966 update) 198.23.5.11 (talk) 15:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Flying Elephants. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Perfect Day (1929 film), you may be blocked from editing. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 19:26, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I named a source. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 19:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

XtraJovial was correct to revert that edit. This doesn't verify the information, and it barely even "names" a source. In addition, it is very poorly written, containing numerous grammatical/mechanical errors, and its tone is inappropriate as well--too jocular. And then it's just randomly thrown into the text, with no connection to what is before or after it. I was alerted to your edits by User:Julietdeltalima's revert of another edit, which in turn prompted me to have a closer look, and it's clear that you are the one who made a lot of edits from this IP address. While we appreciate your interest in improving Wikipedia's articles, your edits, I'm sorry to say, are not improvements, because the problems I outlined for this specific edit apply to many of the others as well. Please reconsider what you are doing, and proofread your edits. Insert proper citations, properly formatted (see WP:CITE, and/or copy the formatting for other citations in the article). Consider tone and appropriateness. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:52, 28 October 2022 ((UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Jo Anne Worley, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You must be much more detail-oriented than this in contributing to the encyclopedia. You must provide a referenced source and proofread your work. Thanks. Julietdeltalima (talk) 20:32, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have had three months of hard work arbitrarily censored,without you even READING them.Those that do read them have heartily approved my accurate movie buff changes.

Hello, I wanted to ask you to be more careful with punctuation when adding content here on Wikipedia. For example, with this edit [2], you failed to leave a space after a comma (,) and a semicolon (;). In addition, you used two spaces between the words "his" and "girlfriend" while only 1 was needed. Thirdly, you put an unneeded line break between "heels" and "for".

Please be more careful when making edits as other editors have been coming behind you and either fixing the issues you made, or outright reverting them.

Thank you. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, when adding a PLOT, please do NOT put the actor's names in that section. Their character's names are all that is needed. Please read WP:FILMPLOT.

Thank you, DonaldD23 talk to me 15:55, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,I'll try to remember the part about the actors.It used to be mandatory to do it that way.

Other editors seem to object to my being right---I'm a movie buff who has SEEN these pictures;they edit me without even looking.

And what about dialogue quotes on films that aren't mentioned in WIKIQUOTE.Is t his encouraged or discouraged? 198.23.5.11 (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes are usually discouraged, so they shouldn't be added. As for the other editors, I don't think they are objecting to whether you are right or not, it more likely is the fact that the punctuation and formatting isn't correct so they revert instead of trying to fix. If you spent more time making sure your edits are formatted correctly then you wouldn't have as much of an issue.

A few other things. When adding a plot, the header should just be "==Plot==" and nothing else. All those extra "-----" that you have been adding are not correct. And the Plot always goes right before the CAST section...no where else.

Thanks! DonaldD23 talk to me 17:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I outline a movie,I've usually seen the DVD a day or two before,so I KNOW I'm right.I hope I get you for an editor more often,as you seem fairer than some of the others I've encountered. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 18:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Dermies away from me. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 18:31, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that you used improper formatting when adding a PLOT to the film You'll Find Out, with this edit [3]. As mentioned in my comment above, do not use the "--------" line in Wikipedia, and when using the header use "==Plot==", not "PLOT SYNOPSIS:".

Also, please make sure you leave a SPACE after a period (.), semicolon (;), and a comma (,). I have been coming behind you and fixing these issues for awhile now and it is getting cumbersome. I may resort to reverting your edits instead of fixing them as it is less time consuming for me.

In addition, you add line breaks in the middle of a sentence. Line breaks only go after paragraphs.

Thanks. DonaldD23 talk to me 01:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I separate with the -------------------------- to make sure different categories don't run together.I'm still a little unsure about these things. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 15:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But that is not how things are done. Using "==Plot==" will accomplish that. Thank you DonaldD23 talk to me 21:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your addition of four actors to the cast list. While IMDB may list them, they are not listed on the AFI Catalog's entry for the film here. Because IMDB allows readers to edit its pages, it is not considered a reliabale source by Wikipedia - see WP:IMDB. The AFI Catalog is curated by professionals, and is considered to be a very reliable source. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Aaron Liu. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Start Cheering, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your addition to A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum (film), you gave the source for the information you added in the edit summary. Please, in the future, put the source in the article using one of the standard reference formats, which you can find at WP:Citing sources. I've fixed it for you in this case, but this is something you should do yourself. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks,but I'm a novice at computers and I'm worried I'll botch it entirely. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 21:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Sheep8144402. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to The Naughty Nineties have been undone because they 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Sheep (talk • he/him) 17:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Wikipelli. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Ironside (1967 TV series)—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Wikipelli ^Talk 16:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Catalyzzt. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Robert Rossen, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Catalyzzt (talk) 14:50, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did mention the source--KING COHN,the biography of the Columbia Studios head Harry Cohn---which included a whole chapter on the making of ALL THE KING'S MEN---Cohn was worried about giving the job to a "novice".

Written by famous Hollywood columnist Bob T homas---and NOT out of print 198.23.5.11 (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}.  HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely protest this block.All I did was add one sentence,truthfully,to a Three Stooges review.

I'm away from my computer this weekend,but I expect to have an answer and an explanation from you when I return on Monday.I find this to be totally unwarranted. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 21:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Once again,a certain editor who apaprently guards his Three Stooges pages zealously has blocked me for six months.,BANK ROBBERS get blocked for six months.All I have done is provide accurate information to movie reviews and actor biographies.Again,I heartily protest this unnecessary ban and insist it be removed.

And nobody has explained a thing to me. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Once again,I protest this block of 6 months,done very arbitrarily and for no rhyme or reason.One editor out of dozens has done this---I have heard no complaints from anyone else!! 198.23.5.11 (talk) 20:40, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Once again,I vehemently protest a 6-month block just for ONE SENtENCE I added to a Three Stooges movie plot.

Other editors have had no objections whatsoever to my additions.If you think The Three Stooges are your personal territory,I shall refrain them.Please drop the block. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 12:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Hello, I'm Novo Tape. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Talk:George Woodbridge (illustrator) have been undone because they 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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 18:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just tipping readers to an old Woodbridge-drawn article that I thought was one of his best 198.23.5.11 (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Liu1126. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Black Pirate—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Liu1126 (talk) 15:25, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, Thank you for adding synopsis to movie articles which lack them, and expanding small sections. However, there are some flaws in the manner you edit which have lead to conflict with other editors. In particular

• Plot summaries are to be written in a detatched manner. Since this isn't my domain of experience, I defer to WP:How to write a plot summary for advice.
• For cast information, it is required to cite a reliable source. Most of your additions to "Cast" sections are unreferenced, and several (particularly those involving uncredited actors) appear to be derived from IMDB listings, which are unreliable. Instead, use the AFI catalog and TCM database, located in the "external links" section of most articles, as those are reliable.

Cheers, Mach61 (talk) 15:07, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My "reliable source" is a new DVD release of this movie, which I saw in its entirety yesterday. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 17:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can cite that! I would suggest typing something along the lines of "<ref>DVD notes from a 1993 rerelease by (example) productions</ref>", which produces "^[1]". Ideally, you should fill out {{cite AV media}} for onscreen credits or {{cite AV media notes}} for the back of the packaging (see Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates to learn how) but that can be difficult. Mach61 (talk) 18:12, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bat Lash, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 18:40, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did leave a citation--the first issue--SHOWCASE #76---I have it and have recalled the events in it accurately, 198.23.5.11 (talk) 18:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:Professor Pyg are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 15:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ae245. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Shadows and Fog—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Ae245 (talk) 14:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is NOT an experiment. I saw the film on DVD two days ago---added two cast members and added one sentence that I thought was pertinent.the one time Allen tries to be a hero, he botches it. 198.23.5.11 (talk) 14:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]