User talk:Editmaster4

Welcome!

Hello, Editmaster4, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Bisbis (talk) 17:34, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 in film

Hi! I just want to point out that, when you do edits on 2019 in film page, please check when those films were released, because films like Replicas were already released in 2018 (in China, Mexico, Russia, and others. just check the foreign section of the film). Box Office Mojo has its own criteria when cataloging a Worldwide list like "* Studio is the domestic distributor. Movies must be released in the US for the year specified to qualify for this chart." (that note appears at the bottom of the 2019 Worldwide page if you wanna check), but that doesn't make it a 2019 film, if a film was first released theatrically in 2018 anywhere in the world, then for a WORLDWIDE list, which 2019 in film is, it doesn't count as a 2019 film, it is a 2018 film! So in the future make sure to check this films, even if BOM have them on their 2019 list, before adding them on this page. DCF94 (talk) 19:07, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi a 2019 film called against the clock is not on the list 🤷🏿‍♂️ 基督教 (talk) 02:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

House (season 6) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Jonathan Murphy, Derek Richardson, Jeremy Howard and Charlie Weber

House (season 3) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Geoffrey Lewis, Geoffrey Blake and David Bowe

House (season 5) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Sarah Thompson, Jack Conley and Evan Jones

House (season 2) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Bruce French and Allison Smith

House (season 8) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Amanda Foreman and Chris McKenna

House (season 4) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tom Wright

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Your recent editing history at 91st Academy Awards shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. shoy (reactions) 20:16, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Big City Greens, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:53, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This whole thing could have been avoided if you had just used an edit summary, explaining your edit, in the first place. In the future, please use edit summaries to let other editors know what you are trying to accomplish. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019 in film II

We seem to have a misunderstanding about Glass' distributor. We established in a discussion long ago, that we should only credit one major worldwide distributor studio for the Top 10 Highest-grossing list. Indeed Universal Pictures was credited as the distributor for Glass up until now because I and others didn't checked the foreign page and just went with what was posted on the first page of Glass' BOM profile. But like I said in the note I attached to my edit, and like YOU said in your contradictory edit summary "Only the main studio gets the credit.", by that argument Disney is the main credit, because Disney has the dis. rights in 30+ markets, plus the foreign gross from Disney is larger than Universal's domestic gross, so I don't understand where your ideea that Universal is the correct pick comes from. Because it's the american market and that's more important or something? that's not how it goes. So I hope we clarified this and can move on. P.S.: The Alita: Battle Angel revert was correct and justifiable, and I commend you for that one. DCF94 (talk) 18:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invite to participate in research and earn $15

Hi Editmaster4,

Welcome to the Wikipedia community!

It looks like you’ve been editing here for about a month now. Did you know that Artificial Intelligences (AIs) support Wikipedia? I’m personally contacting a small handful of new Wikipedia editors to make sure your voice is heard as we build and refine these AIs.

Will you please provide an interview to share your thoughts about AI on Wikipedia? You don’t need any special knowledge on the topic going into the interview. It will only take about 30 minutes over phone or video chat. We will send you a $15 Amazon gift card as a way to thank you for your time.

I am working in collaboration with Wikimedia Foundation staff to do this research, so if you decide to participate, your opinion could help build the future of Wikipedia. Hope to talk to you soon!

PS. You can learn more about our study here.

Best, Bowen, aka Bobo.03 (talk) 23:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do like to participate. I hope I would prove useful in your research 基督教 (talk) 08:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Editmaster4, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to DuckTales (2017 TV series) have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:07, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Fast & Furious 9, did not appear constructive and has 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. 4TheWynne (talk • contributions) 15:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Steven Universe: The Movie. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. 1989 (talk) 21:07, 26 August 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) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

Hello, I'm Magitroopa. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge on the Run, 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 the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Magitroopa (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of 2019 box office number-one films in the United States

Hello, I'm Dougal Dankworth. I noticed that you recently removed content from List of 2019 box office number-one films in the United States without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DougalDankworth 01:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at The Masked Singer (American season 2). 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. Magitroopa (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Masked Singer (American season 2); that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Magitroopa (talk) 19:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of DuckTales (2017 TV series) episodes, you may be blocked from editing. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- The reason why that notes in plot summaries are necessary is because I don’t what users like you to paste shorter summaries in. Shorter summaries less than 100 words would likely cause WP:COPYVIO. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of DuckTales (2017 TV series) episodes. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 21:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- I did remove a line that is bothering you, but the vandalism is that you keep on removing a note hidden in the summary of the episode, we don’t want WP:COPYVIO to be put on summary sections. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 21:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:04, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Haley Tju. You continue to add Amphibia to various biographies unsourced. When I looked at Amphibia, the person was not listed. Please stop your disruptive editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Guest Actor in a Comedy Series

added a link pointing to Amazon

Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Guest Actress in a Comedy Series

added a link pointing to Amazon

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deaths in 2020 - Dame Diana Rigg

Hi. Prefixed awards made by HM the Queen under the honours system in the UK, such as 'Lord', 'Sir', 'Lady' and 'Dame', are always piped in as a matter of courtesy in the Deaths pages, especially given that the subject has recently deceased. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 18:07, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Amphibia (TV series), you may be blocked from editing. Stop clogging episode summaries. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 16:56, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Amphibia (TV series), you may be blocked from editing. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 20:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Message

@Editmaster4 I know your edits are not vandalism, but your clogging the Amphibia episode list by putting actor names in the summaries, making you violate the MOS:TVPLOT guideline. Because of your continual reverts, your also making WP:DE violations.

If you want to fix this issue and have guest star names kept in the article, check out the List of Big City Greens episodes article. At the bottom of each summary, there is a guest star section that features the names of the actors. With this, the summaries don't have to deal with interruptions of actor names.

Similar formatting is on the 101 Dalmatian Street article, a guest star section is listed below an episode summary, the episode that has a guest star section is "A Summer to Remember".

I hope this message can fix your disruptive editing problem.

BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 12:17, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Haley Tju, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. I am not giving you the benefit of the doubt here – your edit was clearly contrary to both WP:FILMOGRAPHY and MOS:DATERANGE. Considering all of your other warnings, continuing down this path will not end well for you. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Repeated Names is Perfectly Normal

You seem to be pretty vague with the use in names on articles. Your going to let a dumb person not know who worked on an episode of any series by removing their first name, even if it was a repeated name, any name is allowed on tables no matter what. Even some people have the same last names like with Chris and Shane, the creators of Big City Greens, they both have the same last name, which is known as Houghton. Removing first names can count as WP:VANDAL.

Also, you clogged the episode tables in the Amphibia article by making the episode summaries more than 200 words in length, additionally you added guest star names in the middle of some summaries because you think they are just "easier for readers to understand", but not when the episode summaries have exclusive amount of detail with them having interrupts with guest star names. It is recommended to read MOS:TVPLOT and WP:FAN so that you could become a better Wikipedian. Thankfully, the list has been cleaned-up as I asked Voicebox64 to fix the problems I had with it.

I'm only trying to help you become a better user here, not here to attack. If you listen to this message, then I hope you improve your actions. However, if you don't improve, your going to receive warnings, and following your final warning, you will be blocked until it expires on a varied date.

BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 00:03, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization of an uncredited role which is a description of the character

I wanted to let you know I've lowercased "street performer" in Rebecca Sugar's filmography because it's not a proper noun and the WP manual of style advice in these sorts of instances is to use sentence case or lowercase (so, at most, "street" might be worth capitalizing). I've detailed this in my edit summaries thus far, but as you reverted without use of an edit summary I supposed maybe you hadn't seen that entry in the page history! - Purplewowies (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit wars on Centaurworld

Please do not keep reverting the order of the names on the Centaurworld soundtrack. That's how they are in the MP3 ID3 tags. Also, I don't think it's a good idea to be so detailed with major spoilers for the series finale in the character/actor list. And lastly, the show is over, there are no more seasons. If something is announced, then we can deal with that news when it happens. Dogman15 (talk) 02:17, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Your recent editing history at Critical Role shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

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 95th Academy Awards, 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 your 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.

In particular, you removed this content without any explanation. —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:40, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's constructive because it's moving down as the schedule moves forward. Editmaster4 (talk) 19:12, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 95th Academy Awards. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Please revert yourself immediately. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't remove content just because a date has been reached. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to 95th Academy Awards, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Jolly1253 (talk) 01:32, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (95th Academy Awards) for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. 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 ~~~~}}.

Salvio

08:54, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are still removing content without discussion, in spite of the fact that you know that consensus seems to be against you – since the last time you were reverted by multiple editors. Please stop. Try to follow WP:DISPUTE, don't simply continue reverting or you'll end up blocked again.

Salvio

13:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at 95th Academy Awards, you may be blocked from editing.

You were literally just blocked for edit warring to remove content with no consensus to do so and did not gain consensus for its removal. Either gain consensus for your change or STOP MAKING IT. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Hi. You've been warned multiple times for edit warring, and now you're doing this? Come on. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:39, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a war when I'm trying to give credit where it's properly due. Plus he was called by this name when he was first nominated, and it looks as though people know him by it. Ergo, this is the correct way. Editmaster4 (talk) 02:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm giving credit where it's due, and also following WP:V. All the sources about his win are crediting him as Volker Bertelmann. example. Are you seeing something different in the current sources writing about his win? Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, he was nominated as Hauschka for his score for Lion. So, to give it another name will just confuse people, and his wikipedia page calls him Hauschka. Therefore, it should remain as Hauschka. Editmaster4 (talk) 02:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not in keeping with Wikipedia policy, which is to follow how reliable sources handle it. Sources are saying that "Volker Bertelmann" won this Oscar. They are not writing that "Hauschka" won it. (At the ceremony, they announced it as "Volker Bertelmann". The official result pages with list it as "Volker Bertelmann".) Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you're coming from, but it just doesn't make sense to have Hauschka in one spot and Volker Bertelmann on the other. It's better to keep it consistent. Editmaster4 (talk) 03:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He will now be more famous as Volker Bertelmann, since he won this Oscar, and not the one for Lion. Anyway, it's fine to have his name different on two different pages, since the redirects remove the confusion for readers; once they click on either name, they see that he has used both names. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]