Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:29, 25 September 2021

Welcome to my Talk page. Please note the following- I may not respond to any un-civil comments left here; in fact, I may summarily delete them. If you don't trust yourself to speak civilly, please feel free to chill out for a bit, and come back here when you feel you can speak to me civilly. You may wish to consider whether a discussion would be more productive at a specific article's Talk page, where other editors will more easily be able to view the conversation and offer feedback. Before starting a thread to discuss any removals of unsourced material from articles, please review WP:V and WP:BURDEN. I will expect any discussions to take those policies into consideration. Also, please note that I have already been the subject of an ANI discussion regarding my removal of uncited material; I will expect any discussions of such here to go beyond what was raised during that discussion. Please be aware that just because something is handled a certain way elsewhere on Misplaced Pages does not mean it is okay for it to be repeated; it is possible the matter was handled improperly at the location being used as a precedent. For more information, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Thank you for your consideration and civility!

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110 111, 112, 113, 114

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

DRN Case Status

If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options.
Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 23:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Vandalism

Sorry for the unprofessionalism but I don’t know the norms of editing in Misplaced Pages. I do the best I can to add information that I can add citations too or to correct the mistakes of others. I have tried explaining to user 24.240.132.234 why his edits are disruptive but he nevertheless persists with them. I don’t know how to report him so I was hoping you could help me. If you need help finding his edits, one of them is on the page Joe Bell (film). He usually edits incorrect information relating to numbers, whether it be the year the movie was released or the number of singles relating to music. The biggest page he tried to edit was Casablanca, and while that was caught, others were not and I had to edit them back correctly myself. I would appreciate if someone more professional helped me with this matter. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

I can't look just this moment, but I'll try to give it a look in the next few hours. DonIago (talk) 01:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

So if you look at their editing history, they've barely edited at all, only once in August, and their edit to Joe Bell was subsquently fixed. Typically when it's an IP editor, they need to be editing rather more frequently than this editor appears to be doing for it to be considered problematic. I'm happy to talk about this more if you'd like though! DonIago (talk) 01:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review this, but I think you linked the wrong page or looked at the wrong one. The page you linked was the revisions to the users page, and the edit in august was someone telling them not to put false information on the site. If you look at their contributions, they’ve falsely edited information onto numerous pages 9 times in the past week, with their most recent false edits being 3 from yesterday. If you can’t do anything about it I understand, I’m just not that familiar with reporting someone on this site so if there really is nothing that can be done, I’ll just try to revert their false edits when I can. Thank you once again for taking time to review this. This is a link to their contributions. (I tried linking it but I don’t know if it directly links to their page, sorry if it doesn’t). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

For future reference, please do sign your posts by adding four tildes (~) to the end of them. Thanks!!!

Also, this will teach me to try looking into such things after several hours of hiking; you're quite right that I looked at and then linked you to the wrong page. Sorry about that! After looking into their actual contributions I did see a number of edits, though it looks as though they've all been reverted at this point. I did leave them another warning telling them to stop making erroneous edits or risk being blocked. Hopefully that will do the trick. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and please let me know if you see them continuing to make poor edits. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 13:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, sorry for the late reply. I thought that the problem was fully fixed but user 24.240.132.23 is once again continuously editing false information regardless of being warned. They changed information on the page The Patriot (1998), twice, and even after it was reverted both times, they continued to change it. They were told that what they were doing was disruptive but nevertheless they continued. They’ve been warned countless times and are showing no signs of stopping, understanding that they are being disruptive, and actually wanting to contribute valuable information on this site. They for some reason like to reference IMDb as they’re source, but even IMDb contradicts what they’re trying to add. At this point I think they are beyond being warned, as they were warned two more times after their final warning, so I ask is it possible to put restrictions on them or potentially block them from further edits. I truly think it’s been happening for far too long. Thank you for your time once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

Hi...I don't think there's much I can do about this. The IP appears to have last edited on August 23, their edits were reverted, and they've been warned at their Talk page. Prior to that I'd warned them on August 11. If you're hoping for a block or such, it's likely going to take a couple of more edits to establish that they're being actively disruptive, as admins tend to try to avoid blocking IPs unless they're being actively disruptive, which means more than an edit or two spaced almost two weeks apart (though if all they do is edit disruptively then that can get them blocked eventually). If you see them make a current (even three days ago wouldn't count) problematic edit and let me know, I can see if I can escalate the matter, but as I said, in this case they made edits that got reverted and they got warned to stop doing so, so...they're on notice. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 02:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I hope I’m not too late but he vandalized Big Fish recently. He continues to put incorrect information about the release date of films and even after being warned countless times and threatened with multiple blocks, he persists. Is there anything that can be done now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

Based on the fact that they hadn't edited in ove two weeks, I gave them a final warning. If they make disruptive edits again anytime soon, I'd be willing to report them to the admins, or you can at WP:ARV. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 03:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

I don’t know where you got that two weeks from cause they edited yesterday. This is a link to their contributions. Like I said, they need to be blocked or else this will continue. They’ve been warned since February and no repercussions have occurred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

You malformatted that; don't add pipes at the end of URLs (but do add them if using a Wikilink), and please do sign your messages by adding four tildes (~) at the end. In any case, I'm seeing no edits from them between August 23 and September 6, which is two weeks without editing. Vandalism repots that don't reflect an active pattern (i.e. daily or more frequent) are likely to be ignored unless a long-term pattern can be established, and in my estimation (since you're essentially asked me to handle this), we don't have that quite yet, though we're getting close, especially now that we have an unambiguous final warning. In any event, they're not editing enough to present a "clear and present danger"; reverting a handful of edits or less is easily accomplished. You are, of course, welcome to report them yourself if you wish to do so! Cheers. DonIago (talk) 03:45, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

They have added misinformation once again on the ghost hunters Misplaced Pages page. Sorry if the link is weird, I will look into adding links and signing my messages more. Since they’ve already been warned a final time, will anything be done? 97.80.116.211

Can you please explain how this edit is problematic? If anything it seems to be correcting a problem. Thanks. DonIago (talk) 03:39, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

It contradicts information previously stated on the page and gives false information. False information is problematic is it not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

Again, please sign your responses by adding four tildes (~) at the end of them.

I don't see that edit contradicting anything. In fact, it appears to be correcting headers that were improperly changed by a previous editor to be inconsistent with the rest of the article. DonIago (talk) 04:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

FWIW, I reported the IP at WP:AIV after they made a blatantly incorrect change to the release year for Jason X after I issued a final warning previously. The IP has consequently been blocked for a month. Hopefully that will address the issue. If not, while they should still receive at least one warning before being blocked again (blocks aren't punitive, but are intended to prevent disruption to Misplaced Pages), it would be easier to block them again going forward as they will have established a pattern. DonIago (talk) 12:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I’m glad this was finally able to be sorted out. Thank you for your help throughout this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.211 (talk • contribs)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
1,076		Total Recall (2012 film) (talk)	Add sources
193		Undecidable problem (talk)	Add sources
107		Arrival II (talk)	Add sources
933		Tabernacle (talk)	Add sources
6		Sovereign Press, Inc (talk)	Add sources
153		Jerome Bixby (talk)	Add sources
382		Skull Island (talk)	Cleanup
135		Alternate ending (talk)	Cleanup
47		Statistical Probabilities (talk)	Cleanup
64		Kender (Dragonlance) (talk)	Expand
58		Wulfgar (Forgotten Realms) (talk)	Expand
51		The Mighty Peking Man (talk)	Expand
1,425		Solomon's Temple (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
27		The War of Souls (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
180		Thou shalt not steal (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
236		Québécois people (talk)	Merge
323		AI takeover (talk)	Merge
47		Star Trek (comics) (talk)	Merge
67		History of Vermont (talk)	Wikify
200		Nicholas Meyer (talk)	Wikify
37		Angel (Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode) (talk)	Wikify
2		Aurelia Mengin (talk)	Orphan
14		Bori, Pune (talk)	Orphan
2		Amina Id Abdellah (talk)	Orphan
74		Christ Stopped at Eboli (film) (talk)	Stub
66		James Dearden (talk)	Stub
11		Antibody (film) (talk)	Stub
15		Grand Isle (island) (talk)	Stub
12		Dark Mirror (Star Trek novel) (talk)	Stub
136		Uzzah (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hal Jordan

I'm sorry for causing trouble at the Hal Jordan page but I had already explained to the IP that Hal, as a character, isn't affiliated to the Blue Lantern Corps and yet he/she keeps adding the Corps back to Hal's infobox. You can check Hal's talk page for more information. Leader Vladimir (talk) 20:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Already contributed there. :) I understand the frustration, but edit-warring isn't the answer. If the IP continues to put their change through now that they've been advised that they're edit-warring, there are better options available. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 21:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

The Addams Family

"non-principal, possibly not real" - What are you saying that the actor and character he portrayed wasn't real and wasn't in the movie? Eerie Holiday (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Just for being helpful here is his Imdb page Ryan Holihan imdb he is credited in the film and had his scenes in the movie don't understand how you can revert the edit without a better reasoning for it. Eerie Holiday (talk) 19:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Please note that new threads should generally be started at the bottom of Talk pages. Thanks!

IMDb isn't a reliable source per WP:RS/IMDb, though I admit if he showed up at the IMDb entry for the film then I'd tend to believe he was in it, and if he's in the film credits, even better.

That said, Misplaced Pages cast listings aren't intended to be exhaustive; rather, they should focus on the main characters who appear in the film, which is why I said the character appears to be non-principal. I'm looking at the IMDb page for the film, and it lists 18 characters without going into the Cast detail. The character played by Ryan isn't among them, nor is the character significant enough to be mentioned in our plot summary for the film. Given that the actor also doesn't have a Misplaced Pages article, I just don't see any pressing need to include him. You're welcome to raise the question at the article's Talk page, or if you can refresh my memory as to what he does in the film that's significant, I might reconsider. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Lumpy Addams and Cousin IT are both showed in minor roles during Festers farewell party both playing a minor roles Lumpy is shown in a few scenes while dancing with Wednesday and later on speaking with Morticia. Also The Amor sisters need to absolutely be added because they are apart of the story line and are both shown in the movie where their characters change the direction of the film by informing Tully about how fester is the oldest and how all of the Addams treasures belong to him and not Gomez which leads Tully to take legal action and ban the Addams from their home. Also The story if you remember was about how Gomez stole the Amor sisters from Fester leading him to leave for 25 years and until he returns also later in the film forgives Gomez for taking them away from him. Eerie Holiday (talk) 02:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps...perhaps...the sisters should be added, but I'm not seeing a compelling case for Lumpy. Please bring up your concerns at the article's Talk page so that we can get a consensus one way or another. Thanks for your understanding! DonIago (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Already have posted my concerns in the talk page. Also if you can give me an explanation on why you would focus on not allowing 3 characters who appear in the film in more then one scene but aren't concerned with the listing of Digit Addams who I can't even recall seeing in the film or even being mention. An fyi I'm watching at this very moment and Mercedes McNab as Girl Scout and Sally Jessy Raphael as Herself are listed when the roles they play are beyond smaller then a minor character please id love an explanation on the reason to keep these listings. I'm trying to learn the reason why those roles are okay to add but not characters who are featured in more scenes. Eerie Holiday (talk) 02:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:OSE. If you want to delete other characters or proposing deleting other characters you're welcome to do so. I was concerned with the edits you made, which doesn't preclude concerns about the rest of the Cast section. DonIago (talk) 02:27, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes that was my reason for questioning you getting rid of my edits when there are way more obvious edits that should have been corrected then mine I felt there is valid reasons why my edits should stay and based on your reasoning for my edits to not be included I was challenging you with WP:OSE because it just didn't make sense to me why you focused on actual cast members that were featured more in the overall story then some that hold no ground based on your principal character theory. It was just over all curiosity in the end. But once again I hope in you look more into it rather then ignore it and wait for others opinions the Amor Sisters should 100% be added. Lumpy Addams is shown as much as Cousin IT is and Cousin IT is listed in the cast so that's why I question that listing. Eerie Holiday (talk) 16:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
309		Beer die (talk)	Add sources
82		Dudo (talk)	Add sources
145		Gambling mathematics (talk)	Add sources
42		Can't Stop (board game) (talk)	Add sources
7,560		Goldie Hawn (talk)	Add sources
116		Trimark Pictures (talk)	Add sources
37		History of Saturday Night Live (2010–2015) (talk)	Cleanup
42		Mad TV (season 8) (talk)	Cleanup
110		Information content (talk)	Cleanup
278		And Then There Were None (1945 film) (talk)	Expand
34		Balut (game) (talk)	Expand
962		Julian Sands (talk)	Expand
65		Fingers (game) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
2,358		Unforgiven (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
4,237		Chernobyl (miniseries) (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
9,542		Timothée Chalamet (talk)	Merge
3,893		Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (talk)	Merge
2,542		Dr. Strangelove (talk)	Merge
516		Magician (fantasy) (talk)	Wikify
46		Yamb (game) (talk)	Wikify
1,020		Finding Neverland (film) (talk)	Wikify
174		Anmol Rodriguez (talk)	Orphan
2		Beijing Subdistrict, Dalian (talk)	Orphan
6		BTU International (talk)	Orphan
56		Carlos Rafael Rivera (talk)	Stub
62		Chō-han (talk)	Stub
44		Bầu cua tôm cá (talk)	Stub
33		Relativity (TV series) (talk)	Stub
69		Witch Hunt (1994 film) (talk)	Stub
5		Diceland (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

CANDYMAN

I guess I'll have to provide an edited version of the CANDYMAN: FAREWELL TO THE FLESH summary because a lot of that detail is better coherent to understand the movie and I frankly don't like the plot summary we have currently as some things are mis-wrote or out of order or don't include important characters at all like the detectives. I feared there might have been an issue and the article was pushing a bit of detail, but I figured it could have gotten a pass since it wasn't OVERLY long. I am quite disappointed. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 03:53, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

If you believe it's not possible to produce a reasonable plot summary for the film that's also under 700 words as described at WP:FILMPLOT, you're welcome to raise the question at the article's Talk page, but I don't think you're likely to have much luck with convincing editors that a summary of over 1K words (at the time I reverted) is necessary. DonIago (talk) 03:56, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. I'm gonna make this work somehow. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 05:13, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Let me know if there's anything I can do to help! DonIago (talk) 05:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I just re-did the plot summary and made it shorter. It might still be a tad bit lengthy but not as much as before as should be alright. Go over it and let me know how it is. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 05:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Um, did you read the changes I did? I'd like your feedback. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 05:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay; I've been out of town for the last few days. I'm seeing that the current summary is 864 words. Per WP:FILMPLOT, plot summaries generally shouldn't exceed 700 words. I think you need to go through it and find ways to bring the word count further down. Please let me know if you'd like me to take my own shot at doing so. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 01:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh wow, so there's 164 words I have to cut out? Jesus...I'll give it another crack and hopefully I can get to at least closer to 700. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 02:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I shortened it as best I could. Not sure how much to take out without removing significant plot points that help explain other things. This is tricky. I probably got it down to like 830 at the most. I guess you'll have to take a crack at this. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 02:34, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

It's getting there! Now at 808. Would you like to take another shot at it, or would you like me to go through it? Also, if it would help, there's a Misplaced Pages tool for quickly getting plot summary word counts that you can access here. DonIago (talk) 02:39, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh wow, so it's lower than I thought it was. That's good I suppose. I'll take another crack at it. I have to go through this carefully now because it looks like some plot points are going to HAVE to be sacrificed here. I don't want it to really look like how it was before I changed it because a lot of details just felt lacking and abrupt. That was the whole point of me filling in those empty gaps and tweaking so the plot felt more coherent for people wanting to know the plot. Gee, 808? I wish the plot summary limit was 800 instead. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 04:43, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome to raise the question at WT:FILM, but I think 700 is a pretty well-established guideline that most film article editors support at this point (indeed, some feel that's too liberal), so it would probably be an uphill battle to raise it. If you don't want to try to change the overall guideline, you can ask the question at the article's Talk page, but I'd suggest taking another shot at it yourself (and letting me do a look-over) to see whether we can find something we can live with first. Sorry if it feels overly-restrictive...I know there've been times when I was making a real effort to pare down a summary and even after doing everything I could, I couldn't get it down to 700 (or reasonably close to 700), and had to tag the article in the hopes that other editors would pick it up (or that I'd get back to it another time) and move on. Trimming plot summaries just isn't something that's worth spending too much time on without handing it off to others, in my opinion...but that does open the possibility that another editor will make a trim you wouldn't be comfortable with. I hope this is helpful, and I'm glad we're able to work together on this. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 14:09, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

I shortened it down some more as much as I could get it. I am DONE with this. I know it's not at the limit so let me know where it's at. You can take a crack at it this time if you see fit. - DevonteHuntley (talk) 09:41, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Alright, I'll see what I can do with it. Thanks for your work on this, I know trimming summaries is a bit of a PITA. DonIago (talk) 12:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

How many words did I get it down to? - DevonteHuntley (talk) 21:52 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Your last edit had brought it down to 744; I made further edits and brought it down to 689. DonIago (talk) 01:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wow! You did it! Congrats and you made word choices I didn't even think to make that I feel stupid for overlooking. That tends to happen. Since we managed to get it 11 words under 700, I restored a few more to get it to 699 so we're still in the clear. Thanks for your help! - DevonteHuntley (talk) 02:28 21 September 2021 (UTC)

This is kind of why I think it's best not to spend too much time working on a plot summary singlehandedly...because other editors may think of things you didn't, though the downside is they may cut things that you wouldn't want cut. Glad we could come up with something that works for you and gets the word count under 700! DonIago (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello D. I hope you are well. Thanks for the revert of the redirect. I was about to make the same edit and was typing a long winded edit summary that included mentioning that the list was nothing like a TV Tropes page - for one thing it was well sourced :-) I caught the removal here so I think we are back to where we were. I am interested to see the first ep of Foundation (TV series) tomorrow. It is one of the earliest trilogies I read as a youngster so I'm wondering how they will present it. It does have a good cast which gives me hope. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 02:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey Marnette, long time no chat! It's funny, I was looking at my watchlist and saw an edit to your Talk page and actively thought, "Haven't interacted with them in awhile!", but I also don't really know how to do small-talk here, and I guess while there are editors I interact with a fair amount, usually it's all project-related talk (FWIW I'm always happy to make friends, it's just not usually what I'm thinking about when I'm here).

I've been doing pretty well, all things considered. A lot better than I could be doing for reasons I don't especially want to go into "in public", heh.

I wouldn't even necessarily be opposed to the redirect, if there's a consensus for it, but since the editor was essentially soft-deleting the article, and it has tons of sources right now...yeah, I think that shouldn't be done unilaterally.

I can't say I know much of anything about Foundation. Most of my TV currently is Frasier, What If... (already seen the other Disney series) and Agents of SHIELD. I hope you enjoy the show!

I hope that you've been well as well, and thanks for dropping me a message! DonIago (talk) 02:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

You are most welcome :-) I try to not intrude into other editors lives too much - sometimes I even succeed. But that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the work that people like you do around here AND I'm always glad to see your name on my watchlist. I'm re-watching Agents of Shield as well. I enjoy all of it but I think season three is especially well done. They weave the various story lines together really well and they made me get all emotional more than once - especially with Bobby and Hunter's farewell episode. Best wishes to ya on wikiP and even more so off. MarnetteD|Talk 03:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

FWIW, I wouldn't mind you intruding into my life given that I've found most if not all of our interactions pretty pleasant to date. :) (laughs) You did a really good job of coming this close to giving me spoilers without going too far with it, as I'm watching S3 for my first time right now. I just found out who Lash is. Best wishes to you too! DonIago (talk) 13:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Facepalm Apologies for the spoiler D. One very nice thing from when I watched the series originally no commercials :-) Enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 21:38, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm watching it on Blu ray myself. :) You have a good weekend too; it's been nice chatting with you! DonIago (talk) 01:37, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
250,457		Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (talk)	Add sources
780		Frankenstein (1931 film) (talk)	Add sources
38		New Alcatraz (talk)	Add sources
400		The Wolf Man (1941 film) (talk)	Add sources
532		Wrong Turn 6: Last Resort (talk)	Add sources
15		Rock Monster (talk)	Add sources
94		QuakeCon (talk)	Cleanup
32		The Bubble Factory (talk)	Cleanup
69		The Mole People (talk)	Cleanup
750		Jawbreaker (film) (talk)	Expand
103		The Creature Walks Among Us (talk)	Expand
40		The Monster of Piedras Blancas (talk)	Expand
32		Adaptive tile refresh (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
100		Polarized 3D system (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
283		Quake engine (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
65		Rating site (talk)	Merge
30		Tuwana (talk)	Merge
114		Computer stereo vision (talk)	Merge
5		Bram Stoker Award for Best Poetry Collection (talk)	Wikify
11		Bram Stoker Award for Best Non-Fiction (talk)	Wikify
1,340		Emerald Fennell (talk)	Wikify
3		Belia of Winchester (talk)	Orphan
2		Alex Chin (talk)	Orphan
3		BW Plantation (talk)	Orphan
15		Falcon Down (talk)	Stub
12		Velocity Trap (talk)	Stub
24		Manticore (film) (talk)	Stub
18		Monster Ark (talk)	Stub
20		Bats: Human Harvest (talk)	Stub
37		Doom Resurrection (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:25, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Cold Front

I restored an edit you reverted in the Star Trek Enterprise Cold Front article. I attempted to explain my reasoning but as I did the flaws in my own edit became increasingly apparent (it made sense in my head!) so I've removed the weak part of the edit that was most likely the problem. Please see Talk:Cold_Front_(Star_Trek:_Enterprise) and let me know if there is more I need to fix or if the smaller delete is enough. -- 109.78.211.177 (talk) 05:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Can do; thanks for reaching out to me! DonIago (talk) 13:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

For your enjoyment

Hi again D. Since you appreciate Roald Dahl I though you should have a look at this box set from the Folio Society. I know they are pricey but the quality is first rate and the cost to look at them is like the pay here at the 'pedia :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:28, 25 September 2021 (UTC)