User talk:Koala15

Koala15, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Koala15! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 01:05, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

A belated welcome!

Sorry for the belated welcome, but the cookies are still warm!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Koala15. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Koala15, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using 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 your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Dan56 (talk) 23:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hey Koala15! I'm awarding you this Barnstar for your works in articles mostly related to animation and others. Thank you and have a nice day! :) Mediran (t • c) 09:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Aston Martin Music (Wale song)

Hi. I just saw this edit you made to Aston Martin Music (Wale song) calling it a hoax. Could you explain to me why you think that? Because if it is a hoax it should be deleted, not just redirected. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 05:55, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Album artworks

I saw no point at all, of you uploading an image that was EXACTLY the same for "Freaks". Doing this creates extra work for the Admins, as that one tried to point out to you multiple times. I do not know if you wanted to seem like the one who uploaded it first or what but there is no sense in those type of uploads. There is no noticeable difference between the two images. STATic message me! 01:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it seemed clearer to you or on your computer, or the "colors seem better". It is still the same exact image. I have been here for much longer then you so I know more about what is and is not new to Wikipedia. As long as it properly displays the cover and is 300x300 or less, there is no point in a new upload to create more work. We both have to work together here and, I do not mean to come off harsh but it just seemed pretty pointless to me. STATic message me! 01:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

So it seems that the cover with just the tiger for Hotel California is the version for the deluxe and standard versions. Also i'm curious why you uploaded new versions of Wolf and Bugatti at all, let alone on separate file pages? STATic message me! 23:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I meant next time just upload it on the same file page as the old one. Do not just create a whole new file: page. As for Hotel California it should just be the one with the tiger. I am trying to revert it to that one on the file page but for some reason everytime I try it turns back into the previous one. You know how to revert a image back right? STATic message me! 23:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Alright good job I saw that. STATic message me! 23:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

What part of uploading a new version of a album cover on the same file page do you not understand? [1] STATic message me! 17:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Letting you know it is more work for the admins to delete a whole file then to just eventually delete old versions of a file, it also keeps all the history and everything together. Trust me at this I am just trying to help you out. STATic message me! 20:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Or I understand what you mean, is the thing that happened with the Hotel California happening elsewhere? STATic message me! 20:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

No you are wrong again. They should be 300x300 or UNDER. 200x200 is just fine considering there were no 300x300 images available online. Maybe next time just do not upload the image if you are not gonna follow the fair use guidelines, and someone else has to fix your mistake. STATic message me! 19:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Czarface, Koala15!

Wikipedia editor Pjposullivan just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Terrific article, a pleasure to read. Many thanks.

To reply, leave a comment on Pjposullivan's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Ready to Die (The Stooges album), Koala15!

Wikipedia editor FoCuSandLeArN just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

cheers for your article. in the future, note that citing amazon, etc. is not considered reliable and doesn't establish the notability of an article's subject. happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment on FoCuSandLeArN's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1999 (mixtape), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sample (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) 09:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Koala15. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 21:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Eve

Eve's new independent label is called "Blondie Rockwell Inc." not "From the Rib". As shown on Amazon, iTunes etc. Also "She Bad Bad" was the first release on Blondie Rockwell, followed by "Make It Out this Town". Please check your edits before changing factual information. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 22:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

RED Distribution run a number of subsidiaries of which 'From the Rib' is one as far as I am aware. per 7 Digital (here and Amazon, Blondie Rockwell is the name of Eve's label, distributed through (RED) From the Rib. iTunes is necessarily always correct as proven at Talk: Trouble (Leona Lewis song). — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 22:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Quick note on G8

When nomming G8s for CSD, it's easier for the sysop to review if you don't remove the redirect. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Reincarnated (album): you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Gold Standard 02:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Again, please post warning templates on talk pages after reverting vandalism. Thanks, Gold Standard 00:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Koala15. You have new messages at Gold Standard's talk page.
Message added 00:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gold Standard 00:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Koala15. You have new messages at Gold Standard's talk page.
Message added 00:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gold Standard 00:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Commercial Performance

I have noticed that you constantly update these sections with the weekly sales figures, and I thank you as I have been the one to do it in the past and it can get pretty strenuous sometimes as I used to be the one that did that in the past. However I do not know if you agree with me, but I have been noticing with just having the first weeks sales and then "Since April 9 the album has sold...." in the section it makes it look awkward and small compared to the critical response section. I think from now on we should somewhat track the sales/chart positions in the section for I would say the first five weeks after release, like I partly did at I Am Not a Human Being II and The Nacirema Dream. Then after those five weeks, then have the tally of "Since April 9 the album has sold....". Every new week the total should then be removed from the end of the previous sentence. If you understand. This should make the article and section look better, also with HipHopDX updating us every week it should not be too hard. STATic message me! 22:00, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I meant it should be more like this [2]. Listing how many copies it sells each week for the first five weeks and then after that listing how many copies its sold to date. Do you understand what I mean now? STATic message me! 15:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Random placement I know, but it has to deal with the same thing. Recently I noticed you have been updating the sales, but using the wrong date. Such as today you said "Since August 28" however that is not true as the HipHopDX article says, "The week ending August 25". You should use the date HipHopDX says the sales track week ended, rather than the date it was published, because we both know there is no way they could factor in sales from today, or the day before, so it is best to just go by what the source says. STATic message me! 16:28, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

It really is not a big deal, but just better to be precise you know? And it would avoid confusion such as this. It is just a minor thing, but it just keeps it consistent with the reference. STATic message me! 18:41, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

April 2013

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to God Forgives, I Don't, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Finally Rich Deluxe.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Finally Rich Deluxe.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Croods, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Sanders (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) 11:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:3ca7864b5098a1fdc2664ad805828722.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:3ca7864b5098a1fdc2664ad805828722.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster (talk) 02:55, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Possible copyright violation

Hi there, great work on the Bob's Burgers episode articles like "God Rest Ye Merry Gentle-Mannequins" and "The Unbearable Like-Likeness of Gene", but in the future could you please take the time to write up fully plot summaries in your own words? The summaries on websites like TV Guide are almost certainly copyrighted, and as such copying these verbatim, as you've done, is a violation of the copyright policy. Thanks and happy editing! Euchrid (talk) 05:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whiteout (EP), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dawn Richard (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) 12:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:David Banner Certified.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:David Banner Certified.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

RE: April 2013

MOS:ALBUM#Track_listing: "A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list ... In more complicated situations, a table or the {{Track listing}} template may be a better choice." Dan56 (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I said this before while reverting you the first time. Dan56 (talk) 00:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rittz

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Rittz requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Revolution1221 ^{(talk · email · contributions)} 03:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Your image changes

It would help if you used edit summaries so other editors know why you made your edits. You should read WP:BRD, because you like to make BOLD changes without edit summaries, then when reverted by another editor using an edit summary, you keep reverting back, most of the time still without any edit summary or even talk page discussion. Once you have been reverted, you should start a discussion somewhere, preferably on the article or image talk page, so a consensus could be reached instead of starting an edit war.

1) Asleep in the Bread Aisle - PNG is a preferred file format over JPG and should be used. You should have tagged the original file for needing to be reduced instead of creating a new JPG file that also was too big and needed to be reduced.

2) Certified, The Hunger for Moore - You never once explained why you replaced these files that were already at the correct size to pass WP:NFCC.

3) Scooby-Doo - This image was not too small.

4) Disney images except for Peter Pan - These images were not too small. The first versions are from October 12, 2007 and listed as "fair use reduce", so they were already at an acceptable size.

5) Peter Pan image - This image is different than the above because it is from a later date, but is the exact same size as the others.

Images have to be orphaned for seven continuous days to be deleted. Once the tag has been removed, you cannot simply revert because the process would have to start over again. You are clearing trying to game the system as can been seen in your edits to File:David Banner - Certified.jpg. You re-orphaned the image on April 25 after three days of it being back in the article, so you should have tagged it for that date. You clearly tried to speed up the deletion today by changing the date to the 17, [3] then to the original 20 and then eventually to the 18, [4]. These are very disingenuous edits that are not acting in good faith.

In summary, I hope that you discuss these edits here instead of reverting back to your preferred versions. I also hope that you can take some notes from what I wrote and apply it to your future edits. Aspects (talk) 23:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I am sad, but not surprised, that you totally ignored my advice. I wanted you to take the time and address the concerns I brought up here, but instead you left one note and reverted back again. Also you did the edits without edit summaries and not restarting the orphaned image time frame, so it seems like you did not even read what I left because you ignored it all. I still would appreciate your opinions on each of the images and the issues that I brought up about them. I am going to find an admin to give a third opinion since you do not want to discuss these issues. Aspects (talk) 02:02, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

In the future, if someone starts a discussion on your talk page, you should contain all of that discussion on your talk page instead of trying to figure out the conversation by going back and forth between talk pages. Please keep all further discussion here as I have your talk page watchlisted and I can see when you add a comment. I have asked the admin User:Masem for their third opinion to help us with this discussion and I am not going to make any further edits to these articles/images until a consensus is reached. In response to your last message on my talk page, I did already ask/talk about the articles/images in each edit summary and in the start of this discussion. Aspects (talk) 02:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Aspects asked me to comment here. We have a non-free content policy that requires minimal sizes, and it does appear your uploads are violating these. If you continue to upload larger-res versions of existing non-free images that have already accceptable sizes, you will likely be reported to WP:ANI and be blocked for your actions. --MASEM (t) 02:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I was just uploading images that fit the infobox, i'm not trying to vandalize or nothing like that i'm just trying to help, the bot will re size the images to meet standards tonight so i hope there won't be any more problems. I will never do this again. Koala15 (talk) 02:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Since the Disney images have been reduced, I am fine with their size. The Scooby-Doo image seems to be about the same size as the Disney images, so I am now fine with that. The Asleep in the Bread Aisle original file has been deleted, but since you provided a reason for the change, even if I could not see this border, I was fine with the original file being deleted.

Now my only concerns are with the other two images. Both the original Certified image and the original Hunger for More were already at the ideal 300 width per Template:Infobox album. I would like to know what were your specific problems with these two images. Aspects (talk) 06:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

There not even using The Hunger for More cover i uploaded anymore, and the reason i uploaded the Certified image was because it was a version without white lines on it. Koala15 (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Koala15, you have my full appreciation and solidarity. I wish you success against this destroyer (Aspects), who hates images which do not conform to his rules, and who enjoys wasting a staggering amount of time vandalizing or otherwise pestering other editors. He enjoys damaging other editors' graphic contributions thus: he removes references in articles to their uploaded images, and then blames those same images for being "orphans", with the outcome that they get finally deleted. He freely admits his limitations, namely: "I have never uploaded an image and find that part of Wikipedia confusing, so I leave that to people who have more experience in that area.", but nevertheless has no shame meddling with images obtained and uploaded by true contributors who have devoted their time, dedication and effort. Also, he freely stuffs other editors' talk page with his sermons, his BS, and his opinions (as he has done in your case), yet has the nerve to forbid other editors from writing anything in his Talk Page (as if he owned it). What still amazes me is that they still call him "a contributor", and even grant him prizes such as "barnstars" & other stuff, despite all the damage he has done and keeps doing. --AVM (talk) 23:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

That is a spot on observation, i completely agree with you. Koala15 (talk) 23:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

In response to your message three above this message, where are the white lines you are talking about? Aspects (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

They are white lines from the original editor saving the image the wrong way, by cutting and pasting it. Koala15 (talk) 20:04, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) episodes

Okay, I'll bite. How is adding a "TBA" episode placeholder, for a show that has a 3 season order, considered "original research"? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:04, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

"There is no need to add an episode with "TBA" as the title, your just assuming an episode will air that day. That kind of research does not belong on Wikipedia"

If you don't mind I'd prefer to continue the discussion here for convenience. Whether TBA belongs in the episode list is a matter of personal preference. I don't have an opinion one way or the other. But reverting another editor's contribution, then citing an imaginary rule about how "episode title (needs) to be here" seems like a matter of personal preference as well. TBA is a placeholder and doesn't impart any information, any more than "--" would. So I think you're stretching the interpretation of "original reasearch". And there is neither a guideline for, nor a prohibition of TBAs at WP:MOS:TV. That said, another editor suggested that another way to go is to create empty fields and comment them out. This way the fields can be used as needed, won't appear on the page, and there are no offensive TBAs. That is what I've done on the page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

It is not an "imaginary rule" i've seen people use that rule on various episode list pages. Anyway your most recent edit of adding blank episode fields makes much more sense. Koala15 (talk) 19:28, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Smurfs 2 poster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:The Smurfs 2 poster.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Scary Movie 5 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to John Costello and Dug

Summer Jam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Elephant Man and Ashanti

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your two cents requested

Input from some established article regulars would be much appreciated here. Thanks! AmericanDad86 (talk) 23:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Re:Epic poster

Well, I got totally wrong about the latest poster being the final poster (sorry about that)! But I can say that it is a new poster, Moviefone says it right here. It also debuted later than the other poster and has the rating.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 06:30, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I already said sorry for the new poster being the final poster! But even if its not the final poster, why do you keep reverting to the older poster? Neither it has the rating nor it is a final poster.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 05:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I will not change it. But please do not revert to the older poster as it is a new poster.----Plea$ant 1623 ✉ 14:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Conduct in Discussions and Debates

Just a comment about this edit: sarcasm has no place in debates and can very easily lead to flame wars. If you feel you have to say something, state it in a matter-of-fact manner, such as "Please note that this person is the article creator". Certainly don't start assuming things, especially regarding their real-life identity. Please familiarise yourself with the Assume Good Faith Policy and WP:OUTING.

Note: assuming bad faith and outing of people can result in blocks. Please practice more careful editing in future. Stephen! ^Coming... 11:33, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The Cleveland Show [moved]

How did it air, did you actaully watch it? Koala15 (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw the episode on television. It was pre-empted in certain American markets due to the NASCAR race. - Fantr (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh they did not play it all in the USA, i thought it didn't air anywhere since fox is labeling it as a new episode this week. Koala15 (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, now I see the problem. Those who get the Canadian superstation Global via satellite saw the program. Therefore it aired in Canada and apparently Ireland. I'm trying to find a RS to satisfy you. - Fantr (talk) 19:20, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind my moving the discussion here. You have far more experience editing the show's page. Here's what I've found.

• A fan review with spoilers posted online on 7 May 2013. I can verify that the spoilers are correct.
• The Global superstation had the video up after airing the episode. They soon pulled the video.
• On twitter, a non-reliable source, people shared links where the episode could be downloaded; several report watching the episode that way. Therefore the show had to air somewhere.
• tvrage.com, which is on Wikipedia's blacklist and therefore is probably non-reliable, correctly states the Canadian air date. The url is tvrage.com/The_Cleveland_Show/episodes/1065265641.
• IMDB, which is a non-reliable source, states that the show aired in Canada on 5 May 2013: link. IMDB message board discussions, which are even more non-reliable, also note that the show aired in Canada here and here.

Let me know if these suffice. - Fantr (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah i believe that the show aired in Canada, i'm just still not sure which air date we should use. I feel like this happened before and we used the USA air date but i'm not sure. I think we might need a second opinion. Koala15 (talk) 23:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Lip Lock

Per the conversation at Template talk:Infobox single, the use of {{flat list}} is an universal readability change, as part of the accessibility movement which makes pages more accessible and readable for those hard of sight. What you deem unnecessary actually makes a huge difference to those who use screen reader technology hence users are now being encouraged to adopt the new mark-up wherever possible. See Glassheart and #willpower as an example of how it should be used in an article. I'm afraid reasons like "I don't like mid-dots won't wash because frankly using dots or commas is purely a cosmetic change for able-sighted individuals but for those who are hard of sight if impacts on the way that screen reader technology reads a page. Additionally it has benefits for viewing on smaller screens etc. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 15:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

If the those are the new guidelines its fine with me. Koala15 (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

They are indeed. Its quite a recent change (as of a week or so ago) but the easiest way to get it out there is to encourage its uptake and put it in a few high profile articles. :) The album sounds really good. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 15:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Monsters, Inc.

Hi Koala, I've begun the GA Review for Monsters, Inc. and added some suggestions to get you started. Let me know your thoughts, and thanks for being willing to take this one on. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for your contributions to bring Monsters, Inc. up to GA status! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

GA Nomination

I noticed you nominated Good Kid, M.A.A.D City for GA review. For future reference you should NOT nominate an article for GA unless you are either the top or second most contributor on the article. Which you are far from. Its wrong of you to jump into the article and take credit for all the work other editors have done. I am within major contributors to this article (along with SrGangsta and Dan56 thus per WP:GA one of us should be informed if another user wishes to nominate an article when us three have done virtually all of the work for. The fact that you didn't even have the courtesy to ask is kindof rude. You are basically taking credit for the various editors hard work building the article when you have less edits then ClueBOT on the article. I would suggest you withdrawing the nomination, and check these things in the future. It would fail due to WP:RECENTISM anyways. STATic message me! 02:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

No reason to take any offense, and I pointed out myself it was not my "credit" I was after, more taking notice of this before the top two contributors noticed. Trust me I will be glad to link to you the exact place where it says you must be one of the top contributors to nominate an article for GA. Even if you made the adjustments necessary, I doubt you would still be high enough to nominate it. When you only have 30ish compared to the 100s by others it is taking credit for someone elses work. STATic message me! 04:27, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions it is highly preferable that the nominator has significantly contributed to the article. When you have less edits then ClueBOT or an IP, then you should not really even consider nominating. It is a pretty good article, give it a couple months it should be a GA in no time. STATic message me! 04:42, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

SNL Cast

"It seems to be confirmed" means It has not actually been confirmed, but I think it will be. That's not good enough under WP:BLP. The source you cite doesn't confirm the departure, but cites an anonymous source for the New York Post. That would be the same newspaper that last month identified the wrong individual as a Boston Marathon bomber and spewed misinformation from similarly anonymous sources about that event for days. (Its sources also "confirmed" that Richard Gephardt was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004; that was not an isolated incident. Every year, various departures from the cast are "confirmed" yet don't happen, cast members are "confirmed" to be staying on, but don't, and new cast members are reported to be hired, but aren't. Wait until it is confirmed, on the record, by a legitimate source. And there was way too much snark in your edit summary. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Farmer Guy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Patrick Meighan

Q-Tip discography (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Girls, Girls, Girls

Spell My Name Right: The Album (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mims

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Weird Al album images

Why are you uploading higher-quality images of album covers if they're too big to be considered fair use, and if they're going to be reduced again sometime in the future? Trivialist (talk) 11:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Carry on, then. :) Trivialist (talk) 21:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

File:J Cole Born Sinner2.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:J Cole Born Sinner2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 16:02, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Cleveland Show

This is why we don't speculate from random blogs something is canceled until the official word comes from the network. CTF83! 03:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Prodigy Albert Einstein1.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Prodigy Albert Einstein1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

AfDs

I've just looked at a lot of those AfDs you've started today, and it looks like you've made a right hash of them. You're clearly not following WP:BEFORE, in fact, you've made nominations that barely apply to the articles at all, at times (naming individual musicians as groups). You've also not bothered to add the AfDs into today's AfD log, and you've nominated far too many, far too quickly. Please stop, read the guidelines, and make sure you're doing the job properly - else please, don't do it at all. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I saw your comments on Lukeno94, and he's actually right here. You're just declaring on these AfDs that these people aren't notable...but you're not actually providing evidence of that, especially on some that are obviously notable, like Kalyn Heffernan. If you didn't have so many edits, I'd think you just didn't understand what notabilty means, but your long tenure here makes me wonder about your motivation. By our very definition of notability, someone who has been discussed in detail in multiple, independent, reliable sources is notable. That's what notable means. We don't get to just decide "Oh, this person isn't important". There are sometimes additional notability criteria that can be used, but you haven't even raised those. On one AfD you state, "Regardless of the sources, he still does not meet notability guidelines." That simply doesn't make any sense. You may want to consider reviewing WP:GNG and WP:BAND, and possibly even withdrawing some of those AfDs. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Koala15, you asked on my talk page which one is clearly notable. It's hard to AGF here, because I explicitly said, just above, that Kalyn Heffernan is clearly notable, as she has received multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. Heck, those articles actually featured her. Thus, she meets WP:GNG. Thus, she is notable. Please explain, so that we can help you: what specifically are you not understanding here? In what way does she not meet WP:GNG? Qwyrxian (talk) 00:08, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Why is the gross of Epic being removed?

I don't understand why is the gross of Epic being removed? I understand BOM does not show domestic gross but it shows the foreign gross? Why is it being removed again and again? KahnJohn27 (talk) 05:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your AfD has been closed

Hi there. Just informing you that I closed your AfD discussion early. See here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yea Big + Kid Static. JamieS93 08:22, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle?

Hey Koala, I saw you nominated a batch of articles for deletion and I thought I'd post you a note. Each of your nominations seems not to have been transcluded properly and bots have added each one to today's log. You should think about enabling the Twinkle tools - there's a one-click XfD function (and a CSD function) that does everything for you. Makes the whole thing a lot easier and prevents basic mistakes. Cheers, Stalwart111 03:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries, I use it for everything these days. Stalwart111 05:22, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Jaynilshah

Heyo, if you see someone deliberately adding false numbers/information into articles, please leave them a warning so that they either stop or can be blocked. In this case, he continued for the entire month of May with basically no one noticing. Thanks! :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 15:15, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

It was on Escape from Planet Earth and Scary Movie 5 today. I'm not laying this at your feet -- plenty of other people didn't warn him either -- just a suggestion to leave a warning next time (if there is one!). Thanks much, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 18:59, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

AT TItle/Logo Debacle

Hey there, just thought I'd drop a line. MoS for series pages states that "The image presented in the infobox of the main article should ideally be an intertitle shot of the show (i.e., a screenshot capture of the show's title) or a promotional poster used to represent the show itself." I don't mean to be a butt (I do prefer the Logo myself), but we have to comply to MoS. Cheers.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

In a perfect world, I'd have to say the logo looks cooler, but I had a similar debate when I was working on The X-Files. It really is supposed to be the title screen.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Too bad

I don't give a shit about you forcing guidelines... You ain't no damn admin... And no admin has yet told me otherwise so ima keep doin it... --2Nyce 15:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Tables

Just remember I was warned to not attack you. I wasn't warned for not reverting your edits. It's time to move on. The Wiki Tables are more applicable for renovating the pages. --2Nyce 19:35, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Show me what guidelines your talking about?? Waiting......... --2Nyce 19:43, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Trey Songz discography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

What Was Found

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines: The first following reads on page: Suggested layout. This is a guide only and editors are free to organise articles differently. --2Nyce 18:00, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

But yet your section doesn't have anything that reads "should be enforced is used otherwise".

This was also found on another related page Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works: "The use of a table may be advisable to keep the information readable and organized".

With this also: "The exact format chosen will depend on the discography and the amount of verifiable information available, which may vary greatly between musical acts. In all cases, the format should follow from what's best for the article, and not vice versa." --2Nyce 18:18, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Courtesy note

Hi Koala15, just dropping a courtesy note that I mentioned you here. Nothing major, just summarizing a conversation we had about TBAs in episode lists, to explain a recent edit on that article. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Koala15. You have new messages at Talk:New Slaves#Third opinion.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 18:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

This Is the End

Did you read the guidelines that I referenced in my edit? See MOS:FILM#Soundtrack. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, so its use of copyrighted images must be limited. Having the soundtrack cover image is not limited use. Erik (talk | contribs) 02:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Koala15, you told me last week that you understand that soundtrack cover images are not appropriate in film articles per the guidelines linked above. However, I see that you've continued to upload such images like at Turbo (film). Can you explain why you're doing this? Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia; we cannot insert copyrighted images so readily. Erik (talk | contribs) 18:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 8Ball & MJG discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foxy Brown (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) 12:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Reflinks (Pups)

Never knew about this tool before, good to know. BTW, that is a great album imo! regards, Middle 8 (talk) 08:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Joey Badass, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. STATic message me! 01:44, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh really? You sure? These beg to differ. Looks like you just removed a big portion of the discography for no reason. STATic message me! 02:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wiz Khalifa discography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Excuse My French (album) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ([[Executive producer|exec.]])}}, [[Rick Ross]] {{small|(exec.)}}, Harve Pierre {{small|co-exec.)}}, Allen Ritter, The Arsenals, The Beat Bully, Bos, [[Cardiak]], Danny Boy Styles, Earl & E, [[
• skuId=8927054&st=french%20montana%20excuse%20my%20ffrench&lp=1&cp=1 |title=Excuse My French [Best Buy Exclusive] [PA] - CD - French Montana |publisher=Bestbuy.com |date= |accessdate=2013-06-23}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

RE: Albums

I said according to WP:NALBUMS if there is not content EXCEPT a infobox, lead and tracklist it is not notable, you sure have trouble reading edit summaries. This was a random independently released (by a not notable label). That is not available for normal sale on iTunes or Amazon. It could even been a mixtape who knows. Does anything about these independently released album scream notable or worth having encyclopedia article to you? It is all about COVERAGE by RELIABLE SOURCES, the AllMusic review in the article does not even have a review, there is just a rating. STATic message me! 15:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Population Control (album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Population Control (album) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Population Control (album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 13:31, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

• To be clear, you do not normally send an article to AFD before you redirect, that is silly to even claim. I went ahead and sent it, but it is pretty common to redirect an album that didn't chart to the main artist, particularly when the primary sources are itunes and amazon, which are not remotely reliable via WP:RS Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 13:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

List of hip hop musicians

Hi Koala15, you will like this list. 12.168.46.153 (talk) 16:30, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Album covers

Please note that we can't use high-resolution samples of non-free media. Usually, album covers should not be much larger than c. 300 x 300 pixels or 100,000 square pixels (see Wikipedia:Non-free content). This is to avoid commercial exploitation of those images while they're hosted here at Wikipedia. And for the same non-free content policy, we can only have one image in each file's history, and the unused old version will routinely get deleted. De728631 (talk) 22:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The latest version of File:The Eagles - One of These Nights.jpg is now 316 x 314 pixels which is ok for a representative use in the article, and meets our non-free content criteria. De728631 (talk) 22:39, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

And I've also reduced your version of File:The Eagles - The Eagles.jpeg to an acceptable resolution. De728631 (talk) 22:44, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Age Against the Machine

"not really paraphrazing"?? We are not idiots. Please don't do this again. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 02:58, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Koala15, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Age Against the Machine has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• 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 a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Wikipedia: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 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.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk 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 without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in 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. Note that the text you reinserted is almost word-for-word from the source. That's not allowed.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Please use edit summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Scooby-Doo does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Mlpearc (powwow) 15:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Album covers

read WP:NFCC... it says low quality too. The quality should be sufficient enough for identification. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 21:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Lasers (album). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. STATic message me! 23:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boss of All Bosses, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mr. Lee (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) 11:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Soundmaster T

Hello Koala15, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Soundmaster T, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. w^{L<speak·check>} 01:25, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

It claims that its song has charted in a major chart. You may have to WP:AFD it instead. --w^{L<speak·check>} 01:27, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to X (Chris Brown album). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. STATic message me! 15:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Not to mention the reference I left in the edit summary, there is just this run of the mill source from 9pm last night. "Brown hit the stage with his backup dancers in tow, sporting a black leather jacket while all the members of his crew donned sweatshirts with a neon "X" across them, a nod to his upcoming July 16 album." Maybe he is going the Yeezus way, who knows. STATic message me! 15:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to ¡Mayday! may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• music-video/ |title=¡Mayday! – Groundhog Day (Feat Mack Maine, Cee-Lo Green & GhostWridah) [Music Video |publisher=Young Money HQ |date=2011-01-19 |accessdate=2013-07-04}}</ref> The band were

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Nacirema Dream may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:02, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fantasia Barrino discography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to French Montana discography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:58, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rebellious Soul may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |title=News | K. Michelle Signs Major Record Deal With Warner Bros, Talks Being Blessed [EXCLUSIVE |publisher=Singersroom |date=2012-11-19 |accessdate=2013-07-23}}</ref> Originally titled '

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Schoolboy Q discography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Feds Watching may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• chainz_has_the_feds_watching_at_summer.html |title=2 Chainz Has The "Feds Watching" At Summer Jam [Video |publisher=Sohh.Com |date=2013-06-03 |accessdate=2013-07-26}}</ref><ref name="autogenerated2">

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:01, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jurassic Park (franchise). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. 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, 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, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 05:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Believers (¡Mayday! album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Believers (¡Mayday! album) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Believers (¡Mayday! album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pburka (talk) 21:06, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Unorthodox (Joey Badass song)

I have seen that you have been going around to numerous song articles and turning them into redirects because they are "not notable". Just because "Unorthodox" didn't chart DOESN'T mean that it isn't notable. You have violated Wikipedia policy many times by doing this. I ask you to please restore the page "Unorthodox" which I have created.  11Block |talk 23:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Have you not seen that the final result of the deletion was KEEP. Stop adding the template just because you are not getting it your way.  11Block |talk 00:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Method Man discography, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Street Life and Streetlife (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) 11:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hodgy Beats Untitled 2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hodgy Beats Untitled 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. STATic message me! 20:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Green Day/Anchorman 2

Look up Green Day Anchorman 2 and you will see that they indeed have a cameo appearance in the film — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreCoolGuy (talk • contribs) 00:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

It has it under all their wiki pages it has them credited being in Anchorman 2. If you don't believe me look up Billie Joe Armstrong, Tre Cool, Mike Dirnt, Green Day and 2013 in film it has them credited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreCoolGuy (talk • contribs) 00:24, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks also quick question would it be ok if we begin a group discussion on adding garage rock to Green Day's genre? It was the genre for both Dos and Tre — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreCoolGuy (talk • contribs) 00:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

You know what else I never got was why they call Green Day, Pop. I dont get that — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreCoolGuy (talk • contribs) 00:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I the in development American Idiot film and Incredible Hulk 2 films in the list Universal films and TW wrote back saying, that they werent even confirmed and they have Universal still has the rights to the Hulk and American idiot — Preceding unsigned comment added by TreCoolGuy (talk • contribs) 00:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Grown Ups 2

Please stop reverting edits on Grown Ups 2. You are about to violate WP:3RR. The edit improved and updated the "critical response" section. If you really have an issue with the six words that were removed from a single review for brevity, please take it up on the talk page. The other changes were to update the RT score, remove repetition and make corrections. Thanks, Tiller54 (talk) 01:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Dreamchasers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gunplay

Turbo (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Variety

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Archcaster. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Fairy Guy because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can 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! 拱連鑄機談話 23:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Chris Brown discography

Hi Koala15, it would help if you also updated the total of guest appearances in the lead section and infobox when you add new features. Also, could you please use the correct date format for references as seen in the article (2013-07-15 not July 15, 2013). Thanks. 0z (talk) 03:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Great, thanks. 0z (talk) 07:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

AGF

I know we have a lot of IP vandalism as it relates to producers and such but "Critacal" is a somewhat known producer that collaborates a lot with Cardiak. I think when the album leaked some torrent/unreliable sites said he co-produced it, which we now know as wrong. Try to assume good faith more, and not make accusations that the IP/user is the producer trying to add their name in, because that is not always the case. No big issue though just something you shouldn't be doing, a edit summary of "Reverting unsourced content" or something looks and sounds much better. Even Cardiak's website says that him and CritaCal both produced it. I am not sure about the album booklet, because I don't have the album. STATic message me! 00:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah that is pretty odd, and I would have probably thought the same thing. However, do you think we should add it due to confirmation by the songs main producer? Unless you have seen the linear notes and he is not there. On the No Love Lost issue I just searched it, and see Cardiak's official site again crediting Critacal as producing the song along with Cardiak. STATic message me! 00:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah that is true, I wish more reliable sources would take pictures of the liner notes like Hothewhiphop does sometimes to make this much easier, since I haven't bought an album since Goblin I think. And unless he's under his real name, he is not in the AllMusic entry for the album so I guess it is just best to keep him off. STATic message me! 01:42, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cashis The Art of Dying.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cashis The Art of Dying.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Year of the Dragon

Many mixtapes are released to digital retail outlets like iTunes, and still available on DatPiff. We call these "retail mixtapes", examples would be that Black Friday and Overly Dedicated. Both were released for free and to iTunes, and not are not their "debut albums". mixtape, mixtape, and many others call it a "free album" which we both know means mixtape, We do not call "Trunk Muzik Returns" Yelawolf's third album, Bastard Tyler's first album, or Blag Flag Machine Gun Kelly's second album, just because they called it a album. That is why E.L.E.2 (Extinction Level Event 2) is his ninth not tenth album. STATic message me! 17:45, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Incredibles

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article The Incredibles you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 11:56, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

AfDs

Hey there, you do a lot of AfD nominating, but you usually forget to transclude the pages to the daily log. This is detailed in step 3 of WP:AFDHOWTO. While a bot will go through and automatically do this for you, it's preferred that you do it yourself. Also, I recommend WP:Twinkle, which does AfDs and a lot more automatically. Thanks, Ansh666 00:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Declined speedy deletions

I've just declined your ten recent SD taggings, as they did not meet criteria for speedy deletion. Please do not add any more speedy deletion tags to articles until you have familiarized yourself with what is and what is not appropriate for a speedy deletion. I find that User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes is also a useful guide. Thank you. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Scary Movie 5 Soundtrack.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scary Movie 5 Soundtrack.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Scary Movie 5 Score.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scary Movie 5 Score.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Amazon.com

There is a new guideline for sources as it relates to albums at, Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. Maybe if you are going to edit album articles you should check it out. It clearly says Amazon is not a reliable source for albums, so no more using it. Instead of just reverting you should have added one of the reliable sources that you left on my talk page, don't you think? I just did not want another not correct tracklist like with Wolf and Yeezus, which were taken from other countries Amazon website. STATic message me! 17:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

They get release dates wrong all the time, and you do not remember the report Dave Matthews was going to be on Wolf. That started on Amazon, was added to Wikipedia and then reliable sources reported it, because it was on Wikipedia, then it all turned out to be wrong, among other credits and names of tracks on that album. But that is just one of many examples. STATic message me! 17:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj Videography.

I currently opened a peer assess for the article Nicki Minaj videography, I was hoping that you could take a look, leave feedback for improvement and contribute to the article where you see it's nessessary. If you can help it would be appreciated. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Nicki_Minaj_videography/archive1 KaneZolanski (talk) 12:00, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Turbo F.A.S.T.

It was announced that Titmouse would be producing the cartoon check their twitter account and Chris Prynoski's account.So will you please fix what you did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs) 00:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

http://www.imdb.com/company/co0186051/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs) 00:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

The other source is Titmouse's official twitter account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs) 21:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Epic

Can you explain why you undid my edit to Epic? The soundtrack section almost never appears after release information, and definitely not as the final section in the article. It typically comes either under the Production section, as in Prometheus (2012 film), or as its own section immediately after Production, like 300 (film). I have undone your edit for now; please provide reasoning before changing anything, so as to not start an edit war. --AznBurger (talk) 19:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Incredibles

The article The Incredibles you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Incredibles for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 00:07, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Congrats! One of my favorites. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

WordGirl at the Movies

Why did you erase Emily and Eli from WordGirl at the Movies? --24.170.77.177 (talk) 02:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Interstellar

I disagree with your logic at Interstellar (film). In the infobox, we have the "Starring" field which will not list all the cast members, but in the "Cast" section, we list more. Likewise, the infobox has crew-related fields that are not comprehensive. It makes sense that we can identify the rest of the names in the article body. We should be able to encourage cross-navigation of Wikipedia articles. Panic Room#Production is another example of this. I ask you to reconsider. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

There is no rule that says that the infobox should be the only place for credits, especially when it cannot mention people like the production designer, the costume designer, and the visual effects supervisor, which are positions for which awards can be won. Like I said, the "Cast" section shows more cast members than the infobox shows, and the "Production" section can show more crew members than the infobox shows. Why would this be detrimental? What about including the crew members in a collapsible format in the "Production" section? Erik (talk | contribs) 17:05, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

As you have probably seen, I commented on the talk page. The guidelines not mentioning crew lists does not mean they should not be included. I think that it is possible that this is something that we never really considered because we assume that the infobox is the only place to name names. We can try to be creative with how we approach film articles. On the surface of it, do you not think that listing crew members is helpful? The production designer and the costume designer have roles that are more contributing than the actors we see at the end of a "Cast" section. We should be able to link to them when possible, to give them access on Wikipedia to their biography and the articles of the other films they've done. Are there other ways to present this information, such as in prose or in a collapsible table? I think what I added allows for easy lookup for their names and roles. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:43, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I think that we have a variety of readers looking for different kinds of detail. We often get detailed about film production or box office performance, but it's possible that some readers skip over one or the other entirely. While we don't want to bloat the article with indiscriminate detail, I think we can follow rules of thumbs about what to include. The fact that film reviews do mention crew credits at the end, as well as highlighting some key contributions, is one. Another is the award recognition for some of the work. I'm not necessarily looking for crew lists all over the place, but I think in the case of Interstellar, most crew members have won awards or worked on mainstream films. As for your "Personnel" suggestion, do you mean something like 47 Ronin (2013 film)#Crew? (Yeah, I put that there... haha. I want to encourage new thinking!) I'll wait to see if others can comment at Interstellar about the crew list. Thanks, Erik (talk | contribs) 18:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Z-Ro discography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 08/12/new-music-kirko-bangz-progression-3-mixtape/ |title=New Music: Kirko Bangz – ‘Progression 3′ [Mixtape] |publisher=Rap-Up.com |date=2010-10-18 |accessdate=2013-08-14}}</ref>
• |"I'm from Texas" <small>([[Trae tha Truth]] feat Z-Ro, [[Slim Thug]], [[Paul Wall]], [[Bun B]] & [[Kirko Bangz]]</small>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Stay Trippy may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Larry David, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The View and The Marriage Ref (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) 11:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hall of Fame (Big Sean album)

Hi, Sorry...I'm not trying to be difficult...just trying to keep it accurate. Peace.—Iknow23 (talk) 19:02, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Album notability

M.O. is not notable for the following conditions at WP:NALBUMS:

1. it does not have a confirmed track listing.
2. whilst 2 notable singles have been released, albums albums do not inherit notability from singles or their artist
3. coverage must be independent of the subject i.e. of the artist/record label.
4. Per the guideline, Separate articles should not be created until there is sufficient reliably sourced information about a future release
   • WP:TWITTER is a source to be used in caution.
5. Per wikipedia is not a crystal ball, a handful of information (poorly sourced) about release dates, collaborations and possible songs constitutes a breach of wikipedia rules regarding future album releases.

It is for those reasons that M.O. is not notable. If you disagree you would need to answer each of the above violations of wikipedia policy. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 23:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Whatever, you make your own rules anyway. Koala15 (talk) 23:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

How have I made my own rules up? I've directed you to all the relevant pages. There's no need to not assume WP:Good faith. If you're miffed fair enough but that's more to do with wikipedia... I didn't form those rules, they existed long before I started editing. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 23:50, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Well you tend to throw up random policys to prove your point. Koala15 (talk) 23:51, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Plus i think it would be a shame not to have this article since the pre orders are already up for the album, but whatever we can undo the redirect when the tracklist or cover is released. Koala15 (talk) 23:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

They're not random policies. Its called WP:NALBUMS as in when albums are notable. If you have never seen policies before or you don't know of their existence then that's not my fault... that's down to you to do the research (you'll see there's also WP:NSONGS and WP:NMUSIC). And actually no... a cover alone and/or tracklisting by itself will not help notability. It still needs coverage from external third party sources. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it's not here to serve as promotion for an album and as for it being "a shame" that's opinion ... wikipedia is supposed to be factual. Pages are only created when (and in some cases IF) they have enough information to warrant one. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 00:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Goodie Mob and Rolling Stone

I was putting in the review from the physical magazine, which it is not electronically available yet, so I linked it to the album reviews section of the website. This is standard operating procedure on here.HotHat (talk) 00:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I fixed the references so that they look more professional as well, but you do a great job on finding reviews and putting them on the encyclopdia.HotHat (talk) 01:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Koala15 (talk) 05:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

It is linked now with the actual review.HotHat (talk) 06:34, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Haunted House 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (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) 11:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Koala15. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 01:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DYK for Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Riddick (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Variety (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) 11:15, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pixar Theory

As the concept of a Pixar Universe preceded the Negroni thesis by a decade, I seek your opinion about THIS. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 20:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I can fold my little sourced article into the main topic Pixar and we'd have a suitable redirect target for The Pixar Theory? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:11, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Bout That Life

As I said there were many different drafts of the tracklist released/rumored about who was featured on what tracks. I do not even think Amazons is the same as iTunes. If you see [5] [6] [7] [8] and [9] all call it a song from Self Made 3 and never once is the word "remix" said or anything. If you think about it, this lineup makes much more sense than a bunch of unknowns on a song about stuntin, especially when it comes to Diddy. Also reverting an edit in whole when I fixed other mistakes (I remember you being the one that expanded that part of the lead leaving French out of the MMG members), is kind of disruptive, if you do not agree with one part of an edit, fix that one part.STATic message me! 02:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Well when Itunes or Amazon post a tracklist i would expect it to be real since people are buying and want to know what there getting but i guess we shall see when the album leaks. And do you have any sources that say French Montana is signed to MMG and has released music under the label cause it seems like a Wikipedia rumor to me. Koala15 (talk) 02:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Who knows the mistake might be the reason they choose to premiere it early, hell Trina is probably credited on that one song after all. I had the same wonder due to him not being significantly seen with MMG as much as Mill or Rockie or Wale are, but if you see Montana's article there are references about the signing. Due to Ross and Diddy's close relationship it is not really surprising that a joint deal was made between Bad Boy and MMG. Also the MMG logo was all over Excuse My French's promotion and the logo is on the back of the album. STATic message me! 02:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh ok that's good enough proof for me. Koala15 (talk) 02:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Since you edit album articles quite a bit, you might want to see this current discussion. Template talk: Infobox album#Time to Update the Infobox for the Industry and Accessibility, especially the discussion at the bottom. STATic message me! 22:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Reply

The article is about the development, not the film. See Development of Watchmen. Rusted AutoParts 03:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

It has been moved to the appropriate location. This debate is over. Rusted AutoParts 03:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Wander Over Yonder

If you have a problem. Bring it up in the "Talk Page" on the article. Where in the rules does it state we treat every episode as "one" not a & b? Have you seen the Phineas and Ferb episodes page? - Alec (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide me with those "other" pages? Plus Phineas and Ferb episodes aren't being aired together anymore. - Alec (talk) 20:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Made a compromise on the page. Works like Phineas and ferb since the episodes are produced together but aired separately. You cannot chane Phineas and Ferb since some did air together. Plus we have sources that state 26 episodes were ordered for the series that was split to 47 when aired.

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Transformers: Age of Extinction may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• boards/transformers-news-rumors/953833-you-wanted-tf4-spoilers-well-did-you.html |title=You wanted [TF4 SPOILERS]!!!! Well? Did you?!! - TFW2005 - The 2005 Boards |publisher=TFW2005 |date=2013-08-
• |title=Transformers 4 film to be titled Apocalypse or Last Stand? Domains privately registered [UPDATED |publisher=Fusible |date=2013-09-01 |accessdate=2013-09-14}}</ref> On September 3, 2013,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lil Wayne videography may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of TriStar Pictures films may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[Category:TriStar Pictures films|*]]|}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeremy Howard (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) 11:02, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Please stop removing my credit from the 2chainz song 'Netflix'

Here are the credits from the liner notes of the album

Netflix featuring Fergie (T. Epps, S. Ferguson, J. Jones, C. Mays JR., T Pentz, D. Allen) (ASCAP/BMI) Produced by Da Honorable C.N.O.T.E. for Honorable Court/Power Entertainment, LLC Co-Produced by Diplo Additional Production and Programming by DJA for Mad Decent

I have the PDF liner notes right here, but are not sure how to post an image as proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blkmsk (talk • contribs) 19:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

MMG

Just because the record label does not make an official statement on it does not make it true, most label do not promote an act unless they have an album out. You do not have a source at all for the signing being a "rumor", when many sources confirmed the signing, along with Fat Trel and Cinematic Music Group president per the XXL source cited. Unless you have a source for the deal being "fake" or a "rumor" or incorrect at all, I consider your reverts without discussion pretty disruptive. HipHopDX, and Complex among others also reported the signing. You may not know the music industry, signings are not immediate and we have HipHopDX recently mentioning the MMG signing. As I said before he was signed basicly when Self Made 3 was already done, not to mention other members of MMG were not featured on the album either, that does not mean their signings were also rumors. Not to mention Trel was advertising Self Made 3's release on Twitter today..STATic message me! 23:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Well i'm definitely not trying to be disruptive, but the sources just don't seem to confirm it. "Reportedly" is the key word in these sources. Koala15 (talk) 23:51, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Lil Snupes death was "reported" too, but because you did not see his body does that not make it true? If the artist and his management confirmed it, along with many reliable sources then we can take it as truth. Also judging by his words here recently mentioning the MMG signing, both sides are waiting to make the official announcment (due to legal issues and otherwise). If he did not sign he would have denied it after being asked that question. STATic message me! 23:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough, you can add it back. Koala15 (talk) 23:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lil Wayne videography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Hart (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) 12:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ratatouille (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ratatouille (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zanimum -- Zanimum (talk) 00:50, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please stop changing the Uncle Grandpa episode numbers

Excuse me sir. Why do you keep undoing my changes to List of Uncle Grandpa episodes. According to the production code, what you believe are two completely two different episodes are really 1 full episode together. If the production code said they were separate episodes, you would be right. But the production code says that two 11 minute segments make one episode. It's also the same with List of Sanjay and Craig episodes. Please understand this and do not change them anymore unless if the production codes, are for some reason, announced to be different. Thank you. --Camcorn2 (talk) 19:31, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Camcorn2

Uncle Grandpa

The a/b episode format doesn't apply to Adventure Time or Regular Show because their production codes say that each 11 minute segment is produced individually. Uncle Grandpa, on the other hand, produces two 11 minute segments per episode according to production code, thus it uses the a/b episode format. Even if each segment airs separately now, they still will use the a/b format, because two episodes are really produced as one. Many animated series do this, such as Spongebob Squarepants, Phineas and Ferb and Wander Over Yonder. --Camcorn2 (talk) 01:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Camcorn2

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

The Smurfs: The Legend of Smurfy Hollow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to CGI

Walking with Dinosaurs (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mike Devlin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to O.N.I.F.C., without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 05:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at O.N.I.F.C., you may be blocked from editing. Dan56 (talk) 22:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Birdman discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diddy (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) 11:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and suggestion

Thanks for the citation style cleanup at Norm Macdonald, but the edit summary was rough, given the editor's newish status. We need more editors, so try to either direct to help References for beginners without using templates, or at least Don't bite the newcomers. Thanks. --Lexein (talk) 02:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Jurassic World

We're not moving Development of Jurassic World into a film article. It is it's own article, so leave it alone. Rusted AutoParts 14:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Call me hypocrite again, were going to ANI. And the issue here is development of Jurassic World is it's own article. It's not where were putting the film's article. And Age of Ultron has many, many, many, many, many sources regarding its filming schedule. Since this is a very shaky production, we will wait until filming begins. Case closed. Rusted AutoParts 14:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

You honestly expect me to take you seriously? I again direct your attention to Watchmen and Development of Watchmen. Two different articles as the production of the film was so shaky. When Jurassic World starts filming, then we make the article, and that doesn't mean moving Development of Jurassic World to Jurassic World. They will remain different. Why is that so difficult? Rusted AutoParts 14:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I did. I revoked the infobox per WP:NFF. And that article needs some editing around so people don't confuse it as the location for the film article. When filming begins, I'm replacing the redirect with content. Because, again, the development page isn't where were putting the article. There is some serious failure on your part to see that. Rusted AutoParts 14:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Theres nothing to talk about. We aren't making Development of Jurassic World into Jurassic World when it's sustainable as its own article separate from the film article. Rusted AutoParts 15:09, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. But what I gathered is that people share my view. Rusted AutoParts 18:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

October 15

Hey man, since we are about the only two that create new hip hop albums, I was wondering if you were planning to create Dom Kennedy's Get Home Safely? Cause if not I will have to eventually get around to making it aha. Also since you created The Art of Dying, I wanted to tell you I am already working on an article for The County Hound 2, so you do not need to bother writing it. I will just be waiting for it to be reviewed or have minor chart success before moving it to article space, so that one disruptive user does not immediately nominate it for AfD, like he did to you, which I know for fact he will. It is pretty crazy, you might want to check some of ridiculousness on Talk: Cashis, including that saying in the article that a single was released is a "commercial" or "promotional", ridiculous I know. Either way don't worry about writing the article for The County Hound 2, because I will have it up once a single review comes in. STATic message me! 23:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah i can create the Get Home Safely article either later or tomorrow, and good luck on the The County Hound 2 i'm sure Niteshift is already waiting to get it deleted. Koala15 (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Alright thanks, I can only create so many articles of the same type before I have to switch up to something else. Yeah, he probably already has the redirect watchlisted and everything haha. There is a little more coverage this time, and if at least one site reviews it, it will probably survive AfD. Who knows though, maybe Cashis will sell more copies then Nothing Was the Same, its a logical possibility lol. STATic message me! 00:09, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Since I could not wait after listening to it (really good album surprisingly, you might want to free stream it on HotNewHipHop if you have the chance), I moved it to article space, and only two hours later the most predictable AfD is history is now occurring. Feel free to comment however you feel on the issue. Peace, STATic message me! 03:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok i will, nice article by the way. Koala15 (talk) 03:59, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited BET Hip Hop Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Hart (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) 11:26, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ratatouille (film)

The article Ratatouille (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ratatouille (film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zanimum -- Zanimum (talk) 00:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Half Million Award

		The Half Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Ratatouille (film) (estimated annual readership: 632,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Half Million Award for bringing Ratatouille to Good Article status.

Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Koala15. You have new messages at Talk:List of Sanjay and Craig episodes#Episode numbering.
Message added 16:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey, I don't know if you saw this discussion thread, but I'm confused by the constant additions/removals of segment pairings, and I was hoping you could explain your objection, as you appear to be the primary objector. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

The Smurfs 2 Soundtrack

What is the real cover for the soundtrack since you took it off — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drizzy010 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

This is the real one, but were technically not supposed to use soundtrack covers on main pages. Koala15 (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Bug's Life

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Bug's Life you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jionpedia -- Jionpedia (talk) 12:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Bug's Life

The article A Bug's Life you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Bug's Life for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jionpedia -- Jionpedia (talk) 12:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Mind Your Manners (Pearl Jam song)

Thanks for your work on this page - I've requested temp. protection against IP editors and their useless trivia. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Headings

Hi. Why are those headings "technically not supposed to (be) use(d)"? The Backspacer article has the exact same ones and that's a GA. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 14:21, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I know its frowned against, i read it somewhere in the handbooks. You can use them if you want just keep the one heading as "commercial performance". Koala15 (talk) 14:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mastermind (Rick Ross album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hot 97 (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) 11:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Victory (DJ Khaled album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diddy (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) 09:24, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Survival_(Eminem_song), have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you to seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. When a consensus has been made on a talk page, it is against the policies of Wikipedia to make changes without further discussion on the talk page. Metalfan72 (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sail Out may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Q&A: Jhene Aíko On Working With Kendrick Lamar, Calling Men 'Bitches' + Falling In Love With Tupac [Pg. 2 |publisher=Vibe |date=2011-03-28 |accessdate=2013-11-16}}</ref>
• blog/2011/03/new-music-jhene-aikos-sailing-souls-mixtape/ |title=Jhené Aiko - '.sailing soul(s).' [Mixtape Download] |publisher=Thecomplexmedia.com |date=March 16, 2011 |accessdate=November 14,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014

Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 01:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

You deleted my edits because it SEEMED wrong?

You delete my edits to Trap Lord album by A$AP Ferg because it SEEMED wrong? You can't delete stuff because it seems wrong to you. So your telling me that I randomly picked songs and said that they sampled it? Fucker it's on WhoSampled just type in ASAP Ferg and you are gonna look stupid as fuck.

Have a nice day fag!

Whoa watch out with the personal attacks, and if you actually provided a source i wouldn't have reverted it. Koala15 (talk) 20:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

2013 in hip hop

Source? Keep in mind if the push backs are real, we need to also update the artists articles with the respective sources. If you removed them just for being unlikly, I do not think we should remove any just for that reason, I mean ELE2 has a single, and another one waiting release, Hustle Gang makes more sense since BoB said they barely started really recording it last month. STATic message me! 03:32, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Most blogs are reporting the Busta Rhymes album is set for 2014, like [10] and [11]. Koala15 (talk) 03:41, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay thanks, also double thanks I had no idea "Thank You" was released today, I have been awaiting this song for awhile. STATic message me! 04:12, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Personal Attacks on Wikipedia

Did you seriously just try to insult me over a genre change? I was only trying to establish a consensus on the Wikipedia talk page instead of starting an edit war. You refused to discuss our disagreement and then attempted to insult me in the edit summary. That was really immature. Seriously, grow up. Metalfan72 (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

In what way did i insult you? Koala15 (talk) 23:27, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Monsters, Inc.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please remember that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on Monsters, Inc.. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 03:54, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

How it is inappropiate that the {{redirect}} template is "incorrect" if "Monster Inc." redirects to the film, and there is a company legally operating as "Monster Inc". Congratulations for the GA status, but you don't own the article to revert other people additions without a valid reason. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 04:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Considering that you said "Those two things are not even close", when a) Monster Inc. does redirect there and b) Monster (company) is legally registered as "Monster Inc.", I can assert you do, and even if not template:uw-delete1 would apply, but you, then, would have said "I gave a reason". © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 04:07, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

List of Pawn Stars episodes

Hi. You removed content from Wikipedia with this edit of yours to List of Pawn Stars episodes, but without providing a rationale for this in an Edit Summary. When removing material, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. :-) Nightscream (talk) 04:51, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

The fact that you do not understand it does not mean that it makes no sense. If it didn't make sense to you, then you could've asked me about it, since I wrote it, just as I wrote almost all the material in the article. Sources are needed in order to indicate where one season ends and another begins. The note, which self-explanatorily does this, and is indeed in the right section to do so, addresses this issue, and also addresses the fact that not all sources agree on the question. Nightscream (talk) 05:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Do you even know what OR is? OR refers to material that is derived from the personal knowledge of the editor, as opposed to being derived from sources. The material in question explicitly discusses what the sources say, so the idea that it's OR is inane. Which section do you think a note about the sources from which the material in the article is derived belongs in? The next time you blank relevant content from an article without a valid rationale or edit summary, I will contact an uninvolved admin and have you blocked from editing. Nightscream (talk) 05:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

"First of all the episode list is self explanatory..."

But where it comes from is not. Sources are needed to indicate where seasons begin and end, in part because most seasons have a mid-season hiatus that some editors have confused for the end of the season, which is one of the reason the note became necessary. And because some sources contradict the others, explaining to the reader which sources the article info is based on is valid. Since sources go in the Ref section, notes that further explain those notes go in that section. The Bloomberg article is one of the sources cited to support the article's version of the seasons. Your statements, therefore, are without merit. Nightscream (talk) 05:54, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Looks good. Good work! Thanks. :-) Nightscream (talk) 17:01, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Toy Story 2

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Toy Story 2 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mediran -- Mediran (talk) 11:31, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Marshall Mathers LP 2

Orlady (talk) 01:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Berzerk (song)

Orlady (talk) 01:07, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Stop changing my edits. This is the second time your changing something I have done with reliable sources.

Yes WhoSampled is user generated however they show solid proof of the sample. Maybe you have never used WhoSample which is why you love changing my edits.

I repeat STOP changing my edits when I have solid evidence. In regards to Albert Einstein album by Prodigy & The Alchemist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PyschopathicMan (talk • contribs) 21:40, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Communication

Mind making a note on my talk page before reverting my edits? Just because I'm anonymous doesn't mean I'm fighting you or anything, but whatever. 75.141.15.56 (talk) 05:35, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem man, i just thought it was unnecessary to make a separate "Response from ABC" section. Koala15 (talk) 05:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

A Bug's Life track listing debate

I'm not going to revert your edit, but I thought I'd address the comments you made in your edit summary:

First of all: I read the discussion the talk page differently. It basically goes like this, from top to bottom: omit, keep (you), [comment from OP], agree with omit (me), agree with omit, [comments from you and OP], omit. This is hardly "only one guy in favor of it", assuming "it" is the change you reverted. It looks like consensus to me.

Second: Yes, we should remove the track listings from any article where it doesn't add anything, per the guideline. This is not a black and white issue, i.e. keep them all or remove them all, with no room for anything in between - a track listing in one article is not necessarily just as as valid or invalid as another. In this case, and probably in the case of plenty of other articles, it adds very little, except to indiscriminately (in my opinion) collect information. Also, "it's already this way everywhere else", i.e. inertia, does not trump consensus, guidelines, or policy.

Like I said, I'm not going to revert (though someone else might), but I disagree with your reasons for putting the track listing back.

--Fru1tbat (talk) 20:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I just don't get it, it used to say in the guidelines that we should put the soundtracks in the movie articles, did someone rewrite it? And almost every other animated film article has the soundtracks in them. And the dude just blocked me for 3 hours with no warning, this is ridiculous. Koala15 (talk) 20:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

@Koala15, I have briefly blocked you in order to give you an opportunity to reconsider your interpretation of consensus in the dispute at Talk:A Bug's Life. I will be glad to unblock you when you are willing to abide by the determination of consensus reached in the discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Bro, that is very unprofessional of you to block me without warning. Isn't that abusing your admin powers? I mean all i do is revert vandalism all day. And you block me over a disagreement without warning. I mean really? Koala15 (talk) 20:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

What did you think would happen when you casually reverted the implementation of a consensus-based close, twice? I have made it clear above that this block is only for so long as it takes you to accept the fact that the discussion at issue ended in a consensus-based close. bd2412 T 20:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

But you could have warned me first and we could have made a compromise. But instead you chose to abuse your power and block me without a warning. It is an insult when all i do is try to improve Wikipedia and you block me over a disagreement. Koala15 (talk) 20:48, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Reverting consensus-based editorial changes is not improving Wikipedia, nor is it merely "disagreement"; it is action against consensus. I tried to explain the outcome of the discussion to you, and you refused to see it. If my words explaining the discussion do not dissuade you from acting against consensus, why should I have any confidence that words of warning would have any better effect? bd2412 T 20:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Would you be in favor of moving the soundtrack to a separate page like A Bug's Life (soundtrack)? Koala15 (talk) 21:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

If you look on the history of that page the soundtrack article was merged into A Bug's Life, were the guidelines against recently rewritten or something? Koala15 (talk) 21:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

First, I have no opinion on the matter one way or another; my only function with respect to this dispute is to determine and implement consensus as to the presentation of the information in this article. Having a separate soundtrack article, if the soundtrack to this film is independently notable, is a matter to broach with other editors of the page. Second, local consensus can override the application of guidelines to a particular article, if editors believe that the article will thereby be made better. I am not participating in the content dispute on this matter. bd2412 T 21:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Well you should know your facts before blocking someone over a disagreement. Koala15 (talk) 21:13, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

The facts are as follows:

1. There was a discussion, which was initiated nearly a month ago.
2. This discussion resulted in four editors preferring one presentation of material and one editor preferring another presentation.
3. This discussion thereafter went without further comment for over three weeks.
4. This discussion was closed by an administrator with a determination of consensus.

Those are all the facts that are pertinent to this discussion. bd2412 T 21:19, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I have unblocked you. Please respect the consensus arrived at in the dispute at issue here. If you are unable to do so, I will have no choice but to reblock you until you are able to do so. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Alright, i won't revert it again. But i think i will start a discussion to see if we should move it to a separate article. Koala15 (talk) 21:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:36, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Toy Story 2

The article Toy Story 2 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Toy Story 2 for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mediran -- Mediran (talk) 10:52, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For making Toy Story 2 a GA. Keep it up! ---- Kailash29792 (talk) 11:53, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

The Medieval Chamber

While agreeing that it doesn't look like a very notable subject, A9 doesn't apply because the artistes have an article. A9 is an 'and' criterion - non-notable AND redlinked performer. For an album that passes one of these conditions, prod or AfD are the only options (assuming all the things like spam and copyvio are also passed, which they seem to be...). Peridon (talk) 12:23, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

"Son of the Bronx" Citations

I just wanted to point out that WP:RSN already "ruled" on whether the site could be used [12]. By reverting your edits, I'm not trying to be a jerk. :)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:17, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah you ruled it yourself. Koala15 (talk) 03:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I politely asked them if we could use it (because I did want to use it, since it had numbers the page needs), but someone else said its not a good source.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah but that was only one editors opinion, people are still using the source on tons of other pages anyway. Koala15 (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foreverly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (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) 11:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Edits on Toy Story 2 Plot

Hi Koala15, no offense but could you please explain why you have undone three of my edits on the plot section of the Toy Story 2 page, even when I had explained my edits the second and third times. Broman178 (talk) 16:24, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

As a third party who apparently watches many of the same articles, I would also appreciate it if you would explain your edits. I understand that it can get repetitive, but many of the edits you're reverting were made in good faith, and it's courteous (and considered good practice, especially in this case) to provide some reason. Thanks! --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Like i said to Broman178 the plot was at 699 words and the plot has to be under 700 words. And considering an editor had just trimmed the plot i didn't think it needed anymore detail. Koala15 (talk) 15:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for this late message as I was busy with other things, I can understand what you mean Koala15 but the problem I have with this version of the plot is that it doesn't explain what became of the new Buzz in the end of the film, the edits you have made make an impression that both Buzz Lightyears go back to Andy's house when this doesn't actually happen (since the new Buzz remains behind with Zurg) and this may confuse other people who are reading this plot. I am fine with the other edits you have made in the page and it is true most plots should be below 700 words. However for films which are even longer is that really possible to just keep plots below 700 words because that ends up leaving out important details? Broman178 (talk) 07:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I just want you to know now that I have edited the plot again Koala15 replacing the bit saying Woody believes all owners will discard toys (due to excessive explaining) with a small explanation of the new Buzz remaining behind. However, the plot is now at 695 words, 4 words below your edits and still below 700 words. Please notify me if you are happy with this new change. Broman178 (talk) 08:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Please do not delete or flag potential "spoilers" in Wikipedia articles, as you did in the article How to Train Your Dragon 2. It is generally expected that the subjects of Wikipedia articles will be covered in detail, and giving a section a title such as "Plot" or "Ending" is considered sufficient warning to the reader that the text will contain revelations about the narrative. Deleting such information makes the article less useful for a reader who is specifically trying to find out more about the subject. For more information, see Wikipedia's guidelines on spoilers. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

Sorry, I thought I was deleting that sentence in the future section, not adding it back in. Sb1990 (talk) 05:51, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Koala15 (talk) 15:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Wolves, and your arbitrary declarations on inclusion criteria

Hi there. The list of released albums in 2013 in hip hop music is a list of albums released by notable hip hop artists in 2013. It is NOT a list of albums released by artists who have Wikipedia articles in 2013. Wolves is a supergroup made up of five artists, three of whom (Ghettosocks, D-Sisive and Muneshine) have their own articles. It is therefore not simply a release by one notable hip hop artist, it is a release by THREE notable hip hop artists. The fact that it redirects to one of those artists' articles is absolutely irrelevant. Now either show me some Wiki policy that backs up your actions, or stop removing the entry. You simply wrote "no redirects", which would mean that even an artist with an article of their own would be denied a listing if they released something under a pseudonym (like Ron Contour, Burgundy Fats, Viktor Vaughn, Black Elvis, etc), which would obviously be absolutely arbitrary and absurd. The issue is notability, not having an article. Try to understand the difference. And also understand that you have no personal authority over the article, and your tendency to arbitrarily declare what can and cannot be included, without citing policy or even explaining yourself, is extremely tiresome, and it's not the way Wikipedia works. - Wetdogmeat (talk) 05:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Well you have a tendency of creating articles for non notable underground hip hop artists so i can't really trust you. And i had no idea who Wolves were but now i know. Koala15 (talk) 15:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Is that right? I can count on no fingers the number of my hip hop BLPs that have been deleted. Sleep and Kay the Aquanaut won't be deleted either. You not knowing who the artists are, and you not understanding WP:MUSICBIO, and you not understanding WP:BEFORE, and you not respecting WP:DONOTDEMOLISH, does not make the artists non-notable. I notice from your talk page that you have a history of nominating articles on notable subjects for deletion. I too wonder about your motivation, but mostly I just wonder whether you understand any of these processes. - Wetdogmeat (talk) 16:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Most of your BLPs have been poorly written and barely have any reliable sources. And Sleep already has one delete vote that shows how notable he really is. Koala15 (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Poorly written? Most of the BLPs I've created are stubs with infoboxes and discographies; I have rarely added prose. And no, a delete !vote from a user who describes himself as an "aggressive deletionist" (see his user page) and which cites no policy and engages with none of the arguments made in the AfD is actually meaningless, as Wikipedia is not a democracy, and !votes in an AfD must be backed up with facts and policy-based arguments, his contentless !vote therefore counts for nothing. The !vote says more about the user than it does about the subject. It appears you still don't understand what notability means. Nor do you understand what a reliable source is, as demonstrated by your mixing up of the concepts of reliability and notability. You think 'reliable' means 'notable'. I've explained the difference to you, but you mystified and aggravated people before with your reckless AfD nominations, so you seemingly need to be told something several times before it sinks in. If you're so confident, you are free to argue your position at the AfD, but you will have to appeal to policy and the actual facts, which means that you'll have to understand the policy and give up your arbitrary and unexplained declarations and delusions of authority. Good luck. - Wetdogmeat (talk) 21:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Just because you think an underground rapper is notable does not make him notable. You continue to make theses arguments about how they are notable but you have yet to prove it to me with coverage in reliable sources or charting albums etc, those are the main factors. Koala15 (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

You realise that there are established notability criteria, yes? Notability criteria is not something Koala15 makes up in his own head. Both artists have been shown to have received non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. That is notability criterion #1 at WP:MUSICBIO. If you were familiar with these criteria you would know this, but you're not, as evidenced by your use of WP:GNG over the more specific WP:MUSICBIO in both AfDs. Go to the articles or the AfDs to see these sources (which, as the AfD nominator, you should have already seen - but this is really just another case of you needing to be shown something over and over again, isn't it?). Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that both artists meet notability criterion #5 at WP:MUSICBIO, that they have each released two or more albums on an important indie record label (Strange Famous and Circle Into Square). The problem here is not the notability of the artists, it is your unfamiliarity with the notability criteria, your failure to understand what constitutes a reliable source (you think 'reliable' means 'notable'), your ignorance of the subjects, and your arbitrary and reckless habit of nominating articles for deletion. Again, if you're so sure of yourself, then respond to my points on the AfDs. I'm done with this discussion now. Wolves stays, and redirects to notable artists' articles will continue to be added where appropriate. This is your talk page, so feel free to have the last word. - Wetdogmeat (talk) 00:57, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I guess we shall see what the community thinks of these so called "notable" artists then. But you still have yet to show me these artists coverage in reliable sources. And you calling those record labels important is just an opinion not a fact. Koala15 (talk) 01:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

[No, fuck it, I said I was done with this.] - Wetdogmeat (talk) 01:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I didn't ask you to respond or swear. Koala15 (talk) 03:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Croz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Garcia (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) 09:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

The Incredibles

I see you simply reverted all my changes without an edit summary and without any kind of comment on the talk page of the article. That is not considered to be appropriate Wikipedia behavior. Would you please explain on the talk page what you were thinking? Invertzoo (talk) 01:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I was going to pose the same question. Edit summaries are good practice for all edits, but making sweeping reversions to good-faith edits with no explanation is not helpful to the editor who was reverted, or any other editors who are paying attention (me, in this case), and is largely considered bad form. In this case, your reversion fixed a few issues, but also undid several helpful edits. If the reason for the revert is "undoing the last 6 edits because it's easier than picking and choosing", feel free to say so... --Fru1tbat (talk) 17:36, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Well sometimes i forget to use edit summaries but i try to as much as i can. Koala15 (talk) 20:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

The Incredibles continued

I have copied this reply of mine from the talk page for that article because the discussion is no longer simply about that article:

"In this case your opinion was a personal attack; that doesn't make it OK. The adjective "lame" is a simple pejorative expressing contempt, it does not carry any useful information. Wikipedia is not a school playground; you have to be careful what you say here, it's all permanently recorded in writing. And just because you "disagree" with an edit, that does not automatically give you the right to revert it -- it is not your emotional response to an edit that counts; what matters is whether the edit actually improved the encyclopedia article or made it worse, worse in a way that is clear to most people, not just to you.

"It is also meaningless to say I took your words "out of context"; the complete context is preserved right here on the talk page; it is a part of the permanent Wikipedia record, which anyone can look up at any time. Your responses to me do not reflect well on your understanding of how to behave properly on Wikipedia. For one thing, you really do need to start putting edit summaries on all your edits. I see that in a note from 14 April 2013, Dan56 mentioned that you have to "give a valid reason...in the edit summary". You were told again to use edit summaries on 11 June 2013, again on 23 June, and again on 1 July 2013, when you were also warned about a content dispute. On 10 May 2013 you were warned about using sarcasm, and also about assuming bad faith, and it was pointed out to you that those attitudes can lead to blocks. On 7 November 2013 another editor complained about your being insulting. On 16 November 2013 an editor asked you to leave a message on a talk page before reverting edits. Reverting edits with no explanation tends to lead to edit wars, which often lead to one or more editors being blocked.

"I admire your enthusiasm Koala15, and I think it's great that you edit articles that are viewed a lot, and also which have a lot of editing, and I think it's great that you have helped several articles to reach GA status. However, at the same time you need to learn to use basic necessary politeness here, all of the time. Edit summaries are really a very elementary thing that everyone is supposed to do all of the time. Not reverting any good faith edits without a careful explanation on the talk page is also a very basic necessity. I am trying to point out that these habits will get you into trouble on Wikipedia sooner or later. There is enough time for you to make an effort to be more polite, more considerate and more careful, and that way you will be on your way to becoming a long-term, highly valued editor who is respected by others. Thanks. Invertzoo (talk) 16:34, 10 January 2014 (UTC)"

First off why are you quoting yourself? Secondly if you check my contribs all of my edits are good faith so i really don't have anything to prove to you. I am done with this conversation. Koala15 (talk) 20:10, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

You may consider yourself to be "done with this conversation", but if you continue to practice the same patterns of behavior -- making a lot of edits without edit summaries, using the revert button on other people's good faith edits with no explanation, and then also being insulting, believe me, it will all catch up with you one of these days and you will find yourself blocked, first for short periods of time, and then if you persist past that, for longer. Don't say you have not been warned. You do show promise as an editor. You have done some good work and it would be a pity to lose you; I don't want that to happen. But on Wikipedia we all have to learn how to cooperate, how to work with others using respect. That's it, that's what it takes, sink or swim, your choice. Invertzoo (talk) 00:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand, i regret reverting your good faith edits and in the future i will try to use edit summaries as much as i can. Koala15 (talk) 01:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Finding Nemo

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Finding Nemo you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jionpedia -- Jionpedia (talk) 19:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Finding Nemo

The article Finding Nemo you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Finding Nemo for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jionpedia -- Jionpedia (talk) 14:22, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Planes: Fire and Rescue Cast

On the Planes: Fire and Rescue page, you put information saying that the three actors from the first Planes film would return. The source I put on the article doesn't confirm this, so until Disney announces the official cast, you have to leave the info be. You can't just "assume" that something is so unless the source says it. Also, Chug, Dottie, and the Skipper are never seen nor heard in the teaser trailer. I've posted a link of the trailer below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzWygkJlGcQ

Rowdy the Ant talk to Rowdy 22:08, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, i never saw the first movie so i'm not even sure who the characters are, a cast list should be out sooner or later. Koala15 (talk) 00:15, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi Koala, might I please encourage you to use more edit summaries? I noticed that you basically reverted all the edits made by DanDud88. While I don't materially disagree with that decision, it's not particularly helpful for that user, or for other users to understand the rationale behind your reversion without an edit summary. Thanks mate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh sorry about not using a summary, i just thought his edit was redundant since we already resolved that episode dispute. Koala15 (talk) 17:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand, and here's another example: IP user 68.228.153.247 has on numerous occasions changed the Sanjay & Craig production codes, which you then reverted with no explanations, although probably because the content was unsourced. [13][14][15][16] The user keeps submitting the information, but in my warnings to him, I can't point at the edit summaries and say, "Look, it was clearly explained ten times why this content is being reverted. Stop submitting it." Anyhow, food for thought. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Well those are not the real production codes first of all and the reason i don't add summaries for those cause it seems like these random ip's don't read the page history. Koala15 (talk) 00:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shrek

The article Shrek you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Shrek for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 18:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Do not automatically revert changes by other editors

I just recreated my edits to the "Critical response" section of The Nut Job, and you should not automatically revert them as you apparently did yesterday. You may think that "It doesn't really make sense to move that to its own paragraph" but you are wrong. Firstly, that addresses only one of the edits I did. As I have written in my summary, I pulled out positive reviews from the long listing of negative reviews, and therefore changed "received negative reviews" to "received mostly negative reviews" because that is more accurate. Secondly, I pulled out the reviews that positively commented on the film's style. This is interesting information, as a number of reviewers saw fit to mention, so those mentions deserve to be grouped. Just because you are compulsively hanging over this entry and updating its gross does not mean that others have no input. Get over yourself and leave my edits alone. — Molly-in-md (talk) 13:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, i think it looks more concise in three paragraphs and frankly it just looks stupid the way you wrote it. And there is no need for your personal attacks i doubt anyone else would have expanded this article. Koala15 (talk) 15:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Berzerk

Why threaten? This is exactly you: WP:THREATEN. You know you're both the genre warrior and edit warrior. Will come to a consensus on this. Start it on the article's talk page now. Hiddenstranger (talk) 15:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Your recent editing history at Berzerk (song) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. STATic message me! 19:14, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Side Effects of You may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:52, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brian's a Bad Father, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Sheridan (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) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Family Guy (season 12) end date

I don't see what's wrong with adding the end date for the twelveth season of Family Guy even if it's ongoing. All I'm doing is adding the air dates for the rest of the season according to The Futon Critic. --StewieBaby05 (talk) 01:25, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Were not supposed to add the end date until the show ends on May 18, and it seems kind of odd to add all those dates seeing as those could be repeats. Koala15 (talk) 01:30, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Fantasia

Hi Koala15! Thank you so much for taking time for the beloved Fantasia article. Like me, I'd love to see this turn into GA status one day, especially before its 75th birthday in 2015! I thought I'd let you know, before working on it too much, that I've been working on a new version (though unfinished) of the article that is, I think, a lot better to work from as it's coming to a direction where it should be. Have a look at it, and let me know what you think. I could replace bits onto the current article and you could do your fantastic reference edits to this version? http://pastebin.com/3tnFG3tz LowSelfEstidle (talk) 20:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I thought the article looked great as it is, but if you have any other new info to add to the article go ahead. Koala15 (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, there are a few dead links in the article. I'm sure at least one of u has substitutes for them links. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, ill try to look in the archives tomorrow. Koala15 (talk) 05:17, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, cool. I'll get onto it soon. Some parts definitely need to be rewritten. Thanks you two. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 09:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your reversion of my edit to "Shrek"

Greetings and felicitations. I noticed that you reverted my edit to the Shrek article, with the comment "Not a Universal film.", which leaves me confused as to why you would revert my changes rather than just removing the references and links to Universal Pictures. Would you please be so kind as to explain?—DocWatson42 (talk) 05:38, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your whole edit seemed pointless and factually wrong. Koala15 (talk) 15:15, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

"Factually wrong"? I don't understand—I made no factual changes. I only alphabetized the categories and made corrections to the layout.—DocWatson42 (talk) 05:39, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

You added the "Universal pictures films" films category which is clearly incorrect. Koala15 (talk) 15:17, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're mistaken—if you check again, you will see that I did not add it, I only moved it around. It was already present in the article.—DocWatson42 (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Nope, i checked you added them. Koala15 (talk) 15:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Where did he add them, Koala? If you're basing that on the fact they're highlighted in that diff, then I'm afraid you're wrong. I don't know who added those categories, but I removed them. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, then i must have been confused by the changes. Koala15 (talk) 16:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Setting aside the Universal Pictures categories, do you have any other objections to my changes to the article?—DocWatson42 (talk) 06:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

No. Koala15 (talk) 15:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cars (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cars (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 3 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Rcsprinter (Gimme a message) @ 18:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

It has now passed. Rcsprinter (indicate) @ 23:20, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Universal Pictures films, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page As Above, So Below (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) 09:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

The Nut Job Blu-ray 3D

Why have you removed it away from me? Check the website: http://movies.wikia.com/wiki/The_Nut_Job#Release

or check the page or that page.

You were saying? So, stop removing it at this page. 68.170.223.13 (talk) 16:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Movies.wikia is not a reliable source it looks like a hoax to me. Koala15 (talk) 20:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Ninja Turtles 2014

This site shows the "official" first look of this year's upcoming Ninja Turtles film. But is it trustable? Kailash29792 (talk) 05:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Well i don't think so, people have been adding too many fake posters lately so i wouldn't wanna take any chances. Koala15 (talk) 05:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

But since the site claims that Paramount Pictures presents the poster and there is no proof that it is fake, we'll keep the poster (someone will surely "upload a new version" of it soon). As for the Pinocchio GA review, all the best. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Mastermind (Rick Ross album), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. STATic message me! 00:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Umm i told you why i removed it, theirs no reason for you to give me some warning like i'm some kind of amateur. Ill just expand it myself cause i'm not a lazy editor that just places tags so someone else will do the job. Koala15 (talk) 00:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Since when is there a time to be waited before maintenance tags can be added? You know the rules, and to remove the tag with such a ridiculous response, I just thought you needed to be reminded that problems must be fixed before a removal. As I said, you might want to see WP:LEAD, to better understand how they are supposed to be written. A single sentence stating who its by and when it will be released, definitely does not comply with WP:LEAD, another thing you should know. Instead of complaining, realize maintenance tags are not a bad thing at all. There is an issue that needs to be addressed and you did not. Removal of maintenance templates without fixing the problem is disruptive and is blockable if it is repeated frequently. Calling me a "lazy editor" for doing a diligent job in making sure the article is of good quality, is a border line personal attack. The lead has looked like that since November when it was created and no-one has expaneded, it should have been tagged a long time ago. STATic message me! 01:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Well the information on the album is scarce, that's why i don't see the point for the tag at the moment. I could try to expand it but their really is nothing to write beyond noting the singles. And i didn't call you a "lazy editor" you just assumed i was talking about you. Koala15 (talk) 01:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

There are sections on background, recording and singles, all things that can and should be summarize in the lead as WP:LEAD, says to summarize all the major points of the article. Also, you obviously were. STATic message me! 01:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Busta Rhymes discography: The Abstract and The Dragon

Please explain why you reverted my referenced non-destructive edit. Thanks. DanteLectro (talk) 05:27, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

They were both the same thing, so your edit made no sense. Koala15 (talk) 15:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

No, they were not. This mixtape has two variations: the full 28-track "The Abstract and The Dragon" released in 2013 which is free for download on livemixtapes.com (it's linked to from Billboard and the album's official website), and an abridged 10-track version called "The Abstract Dragon" made available for purchase in 2014 on iTunes, Amazon and others. The album covers differ respectively. The latter is a derivative of the former but they're hardly the same thing. You haven't done your research and you were being self-righteous. DanteLectro (talk) 01:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

This just looks like an unauthorized download to me, definitely nothing different. Koala15 (talk) 01:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

You're wrong and being negligent. I've been adhering to the rules, I don't need your approval. See Talk:Busta Rhymes discography. DanteLectro (talk) 02:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Typo in reference for Despicable Me review

Hi! Since you built so much of the "Critical reception" part of this article, I was hoping that you might chime in over a trivial editing concern at talk:Despicable Me#Typo in reference. -- ToE 12:51, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, i will. Koala15 (talk) 15:16, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Lego Movie

I don't disagree: "generally positive reviews" is how the consensus currently has it.

While many longtime WP:FILM project editors are moving away from any interpretive statements at all in favor of just giving the objective data from RT, MC and CinemaScore — which I agree with — that hasn't yet been solidified as consensus. Where the project stands right now, "generally positive reviews" is absolutely fine as far as I know. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No, we had the LA Times at the opening of the section, and then Betsy Sharkey of the LA Times again later. A 1,200-word reception section is completely over the top. Please join the discussion on the talk page. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh cmon i just spent hours on it, lots of articles have long sections this isn't even that long. Koala15 (talk) 02:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

3RR warning

This is the required warning that you have reached three reverts at The Lego Movie. A fourth revert will result in a WP:3RR violation. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:NOTPAPER does not mean WP:INDISCRIMINATE. When we have four excerpts all saying the same thing with slightly different words, that's repetitive and redundant. Wikipedia is not supposed to have bad writing and bad organization any more than would a college paper or an Encyclopedia Britannica article. For instance, there's no reason whatsoever to bury a negative review in the middle rather than breaking it out separately. And there's no reason not to group related thoughts. These are just basic tenets of good writing, let alone about trimming an indiscriminate glob that hurts Wikipedia by turning what should be a neutral section into a hype-y fan page. WP:BRD says when your bold edit is reverted, discuss it on the talk page. At least two editors are already there discussing it. We'd welcome your discussion. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Removing airdate sources

Hi Koala, I was wondering if I could ask that you please not remove airdate references from articles, as you did in these edits. As you are aware, we have a lot of difficulty dealing with vandalism, and references are crucial to fighting it. Though you did also add the SonoftheBronx citation, finding out when the episode in question requires some digging, as episode titles are not listed. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:48, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok sorry, but we usually do remove the sources after an episode airs on most episode lists. So i thought it was common practice. Koala15 (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

You might take a gander at this. I think erring on the side of fewer references is almost never the best approach. Anyhow, thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Dude, i understand, but lets say after a new The Simpsons episode airs we remove the source for it because its not necessary anymore. So i just thought it was common practice. I mean on most episode list i edit they always remove the source after it airs, but if you want the sources there i won't remove it. Koala15 (talk) 20:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited God Forgives, I Don't, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Usher (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) 09:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

February 10 Planes edits

Hey there, I saw that you reverted my edits made to the Planes films here and here. I added credits to Prana Studios in the studios section because they are, in fact, responsible for the animation in both of the films. It is stated not only on their wiki page and their official web site, but the end credits for Planes as well. I will be reverting your edits but feel free to talk to me about it. Would be great if next time you could add summaries to your edits so I can understand what your reasoning was. Thanks, Zsxd —Preceding undated comment added 22:51, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Are they credited as an official production studio? Cause if i don't see proof i'm gonna have to revert it again. The movie came out last August and the fact that this hasn't been added till now is alarming to me. Koala15 (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

AfD nomination

Hi Koala15: You nominated Stony for deletion; fair enough, but you forgot to add the edit summary to notify anyone who might be watching the page that it had been nominated for deletion; there's a reminder to do that in the AfD instructions, and I see you've been reminded several times that you aren't giving enough edit summaries. You also didn't inform the page creator, whose talk page was still a redlink; they hadn't even been welcomed. They should know their article is up for deletion, so that they can improve and/or defend it. There's a suggestion on the AfD template, with a template to use, but I would consider it just good manners. I've now remedied this, but please be more communicative. Concerning edit summaries, in Preferences -> Editing there is the option to check "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary", and looking at your last page of contributions, I recommend you do so; you should be leaving an edit summary in the case of all but minor edits to explain what you did and why, and not using them only to respond to others. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know you had to do that. I guess will next time. Koala15 (talk) 20:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring at Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lightning Bolt (Pearl Jam album). 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. 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; 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.
I'm done with changing the article, but see WP:OWN. If other editors are removing the boxes, they are probably trying to help improve the article, and your rationale for reverting is very weak "that makes no sense", "wait and see if the [GA] reviewer has a problem with it", etc. C679 20:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think the person that is adding the content that is being reverted is allowed to use these warnings. Koala15 (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Half Million Award

		The Half Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Cars (film) (estimated annual readership: 964,012) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Bobnorwal (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Go get 'em, tiger! :D Bobnorwal (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Breaking links

Hi, if you change headings in List of episodes pages, could you please ensure that you don't break any links, as you've done twice now at List of The Penguins of Madagascar episodes.[17][18] I did point out that this happened,[19] but apparently, my edit summary was pointless. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that i didn't understand what you meant. I did it correctly this time. Koala15 (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Berzerk (song)

Rap rock is another genre of this song as well has hip hop. hadji87

Disambiguation link notification for February 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Lego Movie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wizard (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) 09:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Potential copyright violations

Hi Koala, please note that episode synopses, such as the ones you added here cannot be copied/pasted from other sites, even from official sources, unless they can be verified to be in the public domain, or to bear a license suitable for use at Wikipedia. Otherwise, synopses must be re-written in our own words. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Well keep in mind that i'm not the only one doing that. Feel free to re word them if you want. Koala15 (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

"I'm not the only one doing that" doesn't legitimize the "doing" of it. Restoring the content with the instruction that *I* should reword them is a burden shift and could be construed as an open disregard for existing policy. Rushing to "get the scoop" by copy/pasting someone else's work is intellectually dishonest, and of no value to the project if it opens Wikipedia to liability. There is no deadline. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Well than is using the episode titles a copyvio too? I don't get this, is the shows plot copyrighted? Anyway i don't see the harm of using the summary till the episode airs, than after it airs we can re write it. 90% of the summary's on Wikipedia are copy and pasted, i know that doesn't justify doing it but i'm just saying. Koala15 (talk) 22:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Titles can't be copyrighted, facts (dates and such) can't be copyrighted. Content is automatically copyrighted. Excessive plot summaries can be considered "derivative works" (see WP:TVPLOT. Anyhow, I think I might be wrong in this particular instance, so I'm going to apologize in advance: I'm sorry for getting a little sharp and scold-y. There may be some allowance for small snippet summaries, although my feeling is that we cannot base the bulk of an article on this lifted content. I'm floating the question over at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television in case you want to watch me make an ass of myself, and I highly recommend that. :) My apologies again. Let's see what happens. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:13, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit war at Ratatouille

I would ask you to kindly please stop warring. You have now reverted me FOUR TIMES[20][21][22][23]. You should be aware that such warring is not accepted behaviour, and could result in blocks. You reverted firstly in a complex edit but without edit summary; then you revert again with "Do not bold names". And when I try to accommodate by not bolding, I find that I've been reverted again. "We just don't" is not rational argumentation, and is about as good a reason as WP:IDONTLIKEIT. You then state "We just don't. Check the guidelines." If you had even bothered to check on the talk page, you will find that I tried to explain the edit, and mentioned that there is no prohibition of this in the guidelines. Now will you please participate in rational discussion? Regards, -- Ohc ^¡digame! 04:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I have never seen this type of cast format used on the encyclopedia. And i am not sure if there is a guideline against it. Try to discuss it on the talk page to get other opinions on it. And you are basically saying WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Koala15 (talk) 05:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Dumb and Dumber To

Can please explain why you keep remove the entry in Dumb and Dumber To? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hommininent (talk • contribs) 04:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that i didn't understand how it was relevant to the article but now i do. Koala15 (talk) 05:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Pinocchio

Good job on the article. I think I might be able to find more in google books though. Any objection to me formatting the book sources like I did in City Lights?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

You mean like a bibliography section? Koala15 (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah with the Template:sfn notes for google book sources e.g Anderson (1983) p.7 and then the full book at the bottom in bibliography, makes it easier I think. I'll try to add to it over the next few days.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Do you have the page numbers for the Hollywood Cartoons book? If so, when I convert to sfn notes can you simply add p= whatever for each ref?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

If it wasn't you can you let me know and I'll ask the other editor of it instead.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

No, it wasn't me those sources were already there when i started working on it. Koala15 (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit on Rick Ross

Hi Koala15,

Why did you delete my edit? He still hasn't released the album yet.

thanks, Robert4565 (talk) 16:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Its not worth noting in the lead and it will get outdated quickly. Koala15 (talk) 20:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

"All for You"

I admit I did base my revert slightly only on what was already in the ref title, but I've done a bit of checking: I think ol' Kelly only appears in a remix of "All for You", and not the original which appears on Coke Boys 4. I personally don't think it's necessary to list every single remix version of a song with multiple different artists (*cough* "U.O.E.N.O." in the case of Future *cough*) in the guest appearances table to avoid breaking WP:INDISCRIMINATE (I usually only tend to do so if the artist whose discography it is wasn't a guest on the original version), but I'll see what you think before I make any more changes to avoid it getting messy. Fine evening to you, sir! I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 22:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Well i think they might have added him in a couple days after it was released, but if you listen to the tape on Datpiff you can hear his verse. Koala15 (talk) 01:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Frozen

Whoops — looks like we were editing at the same time, with the same goal and some of the same edits. Didn't realize. Hope we're cool. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh i didn't even notice i was just trying to revert an edit. Koala15 (talk) 01:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Kung Fu Panda 2

You undid my revision, which is fine, but I didn't see an official reason in the edit summary. By default, no explanation for a reverted edit equates to the edit in question being classified an act of vandalism, however I'm certain that this wasn't vandalism. I'm curious as to what your reason was for the revision though, hence the post. Note that I am not going to readd the material, I'd just like to hear back from you on this matter. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, well a lot of editors add to the movie plots everyday and the plots are supposed to be under 700 words. So when i see an editor over detailing the plot i usually revert it. But if you feel your edit was necessary add it back. Koala15 (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pinocchio (1940 film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pinocchio (1940 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Loeba -- Loeba (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pinocchio (1940 film)

The article Pinocchio (1940 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pinocchio (1940 film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Loeba -- Loeba (talk) 20:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Koala - I was happy to do this GAN but wanted to mention that it's a wee bit disheartening not to get a word of thanks (reviewing does take time and effort). I'm sure you didn't mean to be rude but I wanted to give you a head's up for the future - it's always good to thank your reviewer. That's all, no hard feelings. Keep up the good editing --Loeba (talk) 08:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Hobbit 2 box office

Hi Koala15,

Regarding my edit in the Hobbit 2 box office section, I would like to know why you consider that the references at the end of the paragraph are in a bad format and which Wikipedia guidelines your judgement is based on. In my opinion, I consider this grouping of references very efficient, as it saves space and avoids a lengthy series of small supersrcipts.

Furthermore, my edit also includes other changes. I would like to know if you disagree with any other parts of my edit, like (for example) the other reference which is higher up in the same paragraph.

Thank you. Spinc5 (talk) 20:46, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

We need full references, if you re do it with full refs ill be fine with it. Koala15 (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I would appreciate if you were more specific from the start, as I have done many changes in that edit and I wasn't sure which part of my edit was wrong. The whole edit-war thing just causes frustration and annoyance, especially when you don't know why the other editor is undoing your changes. Thank you again. Spinc5 (talk) 20:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Good Article Barnstar
	For making Disney's Pinocchio a GA! Kailash29792 (talk) 04:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Lego Movie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michelle Morgan (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) 09:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fantasia (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fantasia (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 16:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Why did you undo my edit?

I am curious why you reverted my edit that I made here to the article on The Lego Movie. I wanted to mention something that has been mentioned in other articles about using a song in a trailer that wasn't featured in the movie or the soundtrack. I know that the undo page states to provide a reason for the undo after the default message in the edit summary unless you're reverting a vandalism edit, but why would that edit be considered vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gparyani (talk • contribs) 05:04, 2 March 2014 (UTC)