Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 4TheWynne (talk | contribs) at 23:37, 15 July 2017 (→Mandy Moore changes). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, linking to me ({{Ping|4TheWynne}}), so that I will be notified. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, linking to your username, so that you will be notified. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Gary Oldman

So I'm outvoted on the Hell's Kitchen stuff - fair enough. "Identified in the late 1980s with the 'Brit Pack', the critic Roger Ebert..." does not make sense, though. Gary Oldman, not Roger Ebert, was part of the Brit Pack. Please alter to the correct phrasing of "Identified in the late 1980s with the 'Brit Pack', he was described by critic Roger Ebert...". Cheers. 82.221.133.55 (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

To be fair, the previous wording was also very much grammatically correct – just more advanced – and what you suggested was not necessarily "the correct phrasing", but because you asked, I've gone and changed that part of the edit. In the future, this kind of issue should really be brought up on the article's talk page, rather than user talk pages. Thanks. 4TheWynne 23:24, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

The name of the country of origin of Natalie's Portman greatgrandparents

https://en.wikipedia.org/Natalie_Portman On that page it is written that her grandparents born in 20`s years of 20h Century were from Jewish families coming from Russia. In that case, the parents of her grandparents had to give a birth in maximum 10 year old. Because earlier there was no country as Russia, but was Russian Empire that had hundreds of other nations in every governorate under it`s crown. I just suggest you to change the name from Russia, on Russian Empire that is all. That would be historically and chronologically correct. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacuki21 (talk) 11:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Sacuki21, you need to brush up on your research yourself, instead of telling me what is "historically and chronologically correct". It is never actually stated when Portman's maternal grandfather's family moved from the country – the family could have moved when the country was known as the Russian Empire (1721–1917), the Russian Republic (1917), the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (1917–1922), or the Soviet Union (1922–1991) – and as a result, it is easier and probably less of a hassle to leave it simply as Russia. 4TheWynne 21:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

James Franco Edit

Joshua, first off, thank you for all you do for Misplaced Pages. Secondly, I apologize if you believe I was violating any rules, however, I am merely trying to add his acting studio to his personal page. I don't believe I was citing a poorly referenced article, as it came from Time.com and it a quite a reputable source. If you believe you can assist me in properly adding Studio 4 to his page, I would be very appreciative. Thanks.Stevenanderson (talk) 06:33, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Stevenanderson, I don't know what you're talking about. As far as I can see, nobody's told you or warned you that the source that you added wasn't reputable, and your edit still stands at the page – nobody seems to have a problem with it. I don't know what you want me to do. 4TheWynne 07:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

User Adhamh777's continued disruptive editing

I went to Adhamh777's Talk page and noticed you had left a comment for him in December about disruptive editing. User Adhamh777 has since made disruptive edits to the Eddie Irvine article.

The Eddie Irvine article was protected until recently because of people editing his nationality. Not even a month has passed since the protection was lifted, and user Adhamh777 has edited the nationality of Eddie Irvine in the article, ignoring the comments in the article, and the Talk page discussions on that very topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.73.153 (talk) 21:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I just looked through user Adhamh777's recent contributions, and he has made numerous edits regarding nationality that have all been reverted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.73.153 (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to this, but I don't think it should be a huge issue now – I've given him another warning, but he hasn't made any edits for four days, so that should indicate that there's not much to worry about at the moment. If something else pops up, though, let me know. 4TheWynne 01:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Prototype (band)

You undid my edit regarding adding Sam Aliano to the band lineup. Sam was in the band, I should know since we hired him at the time (I'm in the band). You are correct in that he did not get credited in any official releases, but he did play a show with the band and recorded pre-production demos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProtoDM (talk • contribs) 19:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Who am I talking to here? Anyone can just say that they're "in the band", regardless of how much or how little inside knowledge they might have. It's not so much that I don't believe you, I'm just doing my job my checking – I'm a massive fan of the band, after all. My other question is, if Aliano really was part of the lineup at some point (I had assumed he was nothing more than a session/touring member), why has it taken this long for someone to bring it up on Misplaced Pages? 4TheWynne 21:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hardwired... to Self-Destruct sales

You reverted my edit at Hardwired... to Self-Destruct. I can't find any information on the Internet about the one million copies sold. Here it is said that they sold 516,000 worldwide by the end of December, and that info is also in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeadsOff (talk • contribs) 13:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

HeadsOff, the Certifications section of the article lists the certified units/sales, and the total of these sales is over one million. The reason why I reverted your edit and gave you a warning is because you really should have checked and done a sweep of the article before adding a "citation needed" tag, as it was unnecessary. 4TheWynne 13:59, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Whack-a-mole

It's like playing Whack-a-mole with that Aries sockpuppet. You never know when his head will pop up. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Fyunck(click), tell me about it. Looks like he got me too. 4TheWynne 07:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Even so, no need to keep reverting them on their own page so fast :) it's keeping them out of mainspace and off TPs that's important. IMHO of course. Cheers, O Fortuna! 12:11, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, unfortunately, this guy needs to be kept in check, and if that means reverting him on his own talk page as well, that's what I'll do – that's not an opinion, that's a promise. 4TheWynne 12:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

You have clearly never read WP:DENY then... or WP:TPO for that matter. O Fortuna! 12:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, I have, but not for a while. I'm just trying to make sure that admins are notified, that's all – I'm not just reverting for the sake of it. Nice way to celebrate three years on the site, too, if I might add. 4TheWynne 12:32, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Don't exaggerate: your first edit isn't until tomorrow :p ;) all I'm saying is that, the bloke is now blocked and they're blocked because of this rather than all the reverting; know what I mean? Just saying, there are different ways of fighting these things, and dependant on the circs, some are more effective than others. On a lighter note, well done on (tommorow's!) birthday.. have a cold one on me :) O Fortuna! 12:40, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll keep that in mind for next time. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. 4TheWynne 12:43, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Fair Use in Australia discussion

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

Wanted to Talk about the changes I made

Hey buddy, I'm very new on editing on wikipedia. I just received message about my edits and they're reverted. I'm not sure why that happened. Can you please give me some suggestions on what I can add or what I can't add? My perspective was good to add the source but it seems I was wrong. Just wanted to know so that I can contribute in a great way.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakibul.odesk (talk • contribs) 20:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Rakibul.odesk, sorry for my late reply – I can see that you've come here with good intentions. Admittedly, the titles of the sources that you were adding made them look a bit suspicious to begin with, but all in all, the main reason why they were reverted is because they weren't needed. There are a lot of things on this site that require sources, but this isn't one of them, as the information there is made obvious by watching the film's trailer. Thanks for at least trying to help, anyway. 4TheWynne 13:28, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Good work buddy! I saw your contributions and amazed. Wanna make some like you. Keep it up Rakibul.odesk (talk) 19:51, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

The Fate of the Furious

Friend: please don't use the revert tool as a meat-cleaver when a scalpel will do. Were all of my edits to the plot without merit and irrelevant? I'd ask as a favor in the future to consider editing edits instead of mashing the revert button. It's a newly-released movie, and much of the plot section is still vague, and I apologize that my contributions were deemed too verbose. Please also consider whether the entire article will collapse if the plot section is 8 words over a suggested guideline.

Okay -- I've had my say and I'll leave it there; I'm giving up on further edits to the page as it's clear to me that they aren't really welcomed. Thanks Fmitterand (talk) 11:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Fmitterand, that won't be necessary. Having created the article with Captain Assassin!, one of my sole purposes is to try and maintain the article as best as possible – I have a very specific vision – and not just in the newly-created plot section. I don't just smash the revert button (that's what pissed me off more than anything), and if you look at the page's history – from top to bottom – you'll find that I've done more for the article than anyone. Now, to address the edits themselves, you've obviously done it in two parts: "mysterious video on a smart phone" and "zero-day exploits". The rest is just extra words that, as explained, aren't needed. The audience isn't shown what's on the phone (and you think "much of the plot section is still vague"?), and the zero-day exploits is, similarly, too wordy (for most readers, anyway) – "hacking into " is enough. I'm not unreasonable, but I do know what I'm doing; I went through the same process with the Furious 7 article, which is the only article I've edited more than this one. Regarding your last point, it's really not hard to follow the guideline (within reason), and with respect, most readers will probably care more about the plot section, along with lead and cast, than anything else. That's why they are the three sections that I edit once the film is in cinemas. 4TheWynne 12:38, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

In light of all that, I say let's just get the mods to lock this bad boy down; no need to allow Philistines like myself to mess with perfection! Okay, that was sarcastic, but I get it: you thought my contributions were entirely unconstructive and should have been thrown out instead of making an effort to improve or change them -- a tactic with which I disagree. As I said, I'm moving on; it's just not worth the effort to improve articles that are jealously protected. Misplaced Pages doesn't work well when users feel/act like they own certain articles and thus are more-worthy of saying what's valid to include and what's not. And it drives good editors away and kills collaboration. Fmitterand (talk) 13:09, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Fmitterand, I am in no way trying to condone your edits or make out that I own the article (nothing wrong with me trying to prove my credentials). I can see that you have come with good intentions, and majority of the editors on this site aren't like that. You don't need to jump to conclusions or make sarcastic (or worse) comments – this is nothing more than a disagreement, and there's no need to exaggerate or overreact to my feedback. But if that's the way that you see it, then I won't bother you about it. 4TheWynne 13:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Christian Bale

I have noted your comment to me on Christian Bale's talk page, and I see that you have taken exception to my questioning why and / or how one single person can place a lock on an article while it is still under heated discussion. You have responded to my "objection" in what I would consider to be a fairly reactionary manner. I also see very clearly from your own talk page that you are very active in editing and reverting other people's contributions, with most of the feedback falling on the negative side.

Let me say that I can easily make myself an admin. For many years, I have been content to merely contribute money and knowledge. However, if you wish to engage in such a contest, then please, by all means, let us engage. If you care about WP and what it stands for, then let's simply do that. If this becomes personal then we certainly have ways of resolving those types of issues right here at WP. If your goal is making WP a better online encyclopedia, then we have the same goal and I have no quarrel with you. If you do not share that goal, and are only attempting to initiate trouble, then I will most certainly accommodate you in that effort.

Sincerely, Tjp1962 (talk) 08:08, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Tjp1962, I'm going to ignore most of what you've just said and get straight to the heart of the matter: saying that Bale is Welsh because he was born in Wales is original research. This is not the first time that I have said this to another user, and at the rate that the discussion is going, it most certainly won't be the last. Please understand that this discussion has been happening on and off for years – the current section on the talk page is not the only discussion that has taken place regarding Bale's nationality. Find multiple reliable sources stating that Bale is Welsh, and then we're getting somewhere (but it probably still won't be changed anyway). Now, I would be able to understand why you would "question why and/or how one single person can while it is still under heated discussion" if you were a new user, but you're not. If IPs keep on changing the nationality on a WP:BLP article without providing reliable sources, users like myself will revert them until an administrator places semi-protection on the article to prevent IPs from editing the article. You obviously wanted to change the nationality, but couldn't, and wanted to know why – that is why. 4TheWynne 09:05, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Fate of the Furious Edit

Hi,

I tend to do a brief perusal of the movie summaries on Wiki of movies I watch the day of and decided to look at it for Fate of the Furious. I felt that some of the parts were very much out of order and didn't flow to me quite right. I added maybe several sentences or three to add more context to the situation to make it feel more viable, if that makes sense. If I did something wrong, please tell me as I do not do these often. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gr33nappleboy (talk • contribs) 08:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Gr33nappleboy, everything was in order and flowed just fine – I don't know where you're getting that from, so I'm going to disregard that. The main reason why it wasn't necessary (and I understand if you didn't know this) is because, if you have a look at the note at the top of the section (when you edit the "Plot" section), you'll find that there is a word limit of 700; the word count was at about 690 at the time. Additionally, don't forget to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). 4TheWynne 08:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I get the word count but I know for sure that at least an event or two was out of place and the situation wasn't fully depicted Gr33nappleboy (talk) 02:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Gr33nappleboy, I assure you, nothing was out of place, and your edit did nothing to fix it – it only made it wordier and, as a result, messier. 4TheWynne 03:27, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

For one, Dom was not challenged by Fernando. Letty told Dom that his cousin was in trouble and Dom challenged Fernando to a race. Second, Cipher's hacking of the cars was not meant to facilitate Dom's escape. It was meant in order to wreak havoc and, in the process, pin the Minister of Defense where he was. Third, their vehicles were not modified and not sure who the heck Petty is. They got the cars from the hold provided by Nobody. Sure I may have made it slightly wordier but those are for sure the incorrect parts of the plot summary that I just pointed out Gr33nappleboy (talk) 05:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Liam Neeson

Why was my edit removed, when it corrected a minor flaw. He is against the gun right allowing one to carry a gun freely. Which I edited it to. What it says now is that the gun right is unrestricted, but although there are few restrictions, there are some restrictions, and he doesn't say he's against I unrestricted, he's against it freely as it already isn't completely unrestricted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.135.1.255 (talk) 12:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Foo Fighters Change

I have read your message, and I had forgot to cite a source. Apologies, I will make sure of it.

- Thanks,

T.smith098 — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.smith098 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Jeff Bridges movie edited out, why?

Hello 4TheWynne, how come you removed Jeff Bridges' movie Against All Odds (1984) from the 1st paragraph? 124.191.66.108 (talk) 05:08, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Metallica chronology

Hi. How is it disruptive to add Lulu to Metallica's chronology? It's part of their history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveng (talk • contribs) 04:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Archiveng, the chronology refers to the studio album chronology, not all releases – the other album articles demonstrate this. 4TheWynne 04:20, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Lulu was a studio album! Perhaps you should edit the info box to have a heading more specific to your intention than "chronology." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveng (talk • contribs) 04:41, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Lulu was a collaborative album, and that wasn't the only change that you made, either – you know full well that Beyond Magnetic is not a studio album, either. Last I checked, you can't change the heading in question to "studio album chronology" from "chronology" – and not because it's "my intention" – so no. 4TheWynne 04:55, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

You realize the Black Flag chronology mixes EPs and LPs? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveng (talk • contribs) 05:02, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

A lot of other articles probably do that, too – but the Metallica article is a featured article, as are a lot of its album articles, so I don't care. 4TheWynne 05:11, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Lars Ulrich Awards and Honors Edit

Hello. I am the user who made the edit to the Awards and Honors section of Lars Ulrich's page last night (apologies for not doing it using my account, I forgot to log in), and I have a question regarding the reversal of my edit. I fail to see how correcting misinformation on the page isn't constructive. Lars was not Knighted by Margrethe II, he was knighted by Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark, on Monday, June 12, 2017. My source was clearly credited, and if Loudwire isn't a credible source (which makes no sense, since they're one of the biggest heavy metal news websites out there) then there are multiple other articles which state the same thing that I did. So why was the change reverted? Please message me back as soon as you can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThatOneJewishMetalhead (talk • contribs) 19:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

ThatOneJewishMetalhead, if you look beyond the fact that you probably used the Loudwire article because you like the site and/or access it regularly – however credible it may be – and actually read what both it and the original article both say, you'll find that they both source the same Danish article, which supports the information that you changed from and not that of the Loudwire article. Therefore, as you changed sourced information without checking – which you call "correcting misinformation" – I perceived it as unconstructive. 4TheWynne 22:32, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Actually, the article clearly states that it wasn't the Queen that Knighted him, it was Prince Frederik, and it even has a picture of him and Prince Frederik shortly after he was given the Cross. The only reason that they linked to that Danish article was for context as to why he was Knighted. You can see the picture here: https://www.instagram.com/p/BVSvt64A-Zc — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThatOneJewishMetalhead (talk • contribs) 01:27, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

ThatOneJewishMetalhead, I know about the picture – I already liked it on Instagram – but that doesn't change the fact that the information in the Danish article supports the original CBS article, not the Loudwire article. I know exactly what the Loudwire article says – I can read (and use Google Translate, for that matter) – but the article actually mentions Misplaced Pages, which is suspicious enough in itself. If you are right and "there are multiple other articles which state the same thing that you did", then by all means, bring it up on the talk page. 4TheWynne 02:15, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Instrument links

Hello. I apologize for those edits to Metallica and Megadeth. How may I better myself then?

MetalSword (talk) 04:07, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

MetalSword, instrument links aren't necessary, at least not on (main) band pages. 4TheWynne 11:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Ethnicelebs.com is a very reliable source

Ethnicelebs.com is very credible and reliable source just ask Jew Or Not Jew.com

No. 4TheWynne 03:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Inappropriate warning

Hi 4TheWynne could you please explain why you issued this completely inappropriate warning - almost a threat - to the IP user:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:220.244.57.53&diff=788101160&oldid=787464640

Hi edit, was good, and not at all disruptive. He simply replaced one word with an equivalent. And for what it's worth, I hate the use of "authored" as well; it's verb misuse. Thanks, MidnightBlue (Talk) 18:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

MidnightBlueMan, that's your interpretation/opinion. The term "authored" is used very commonly around these kind of articles, particularly when applied to celebrities who only write one or two books in their lifetime (such as an autobiography), and it's just better English than "wrote". 4TheWynne 22:51, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Regardless, the warning you issued was way over the top for an edit that was neither vandalism nor disruptive. MidnightBlue (Talk) 12:50, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

MidnightBlueMan, I perceived it as disruptive, for the reasons stated above, and the term "vandalism" was never used. 4TheWynne 13:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Mandy Moore changes

Sorry, forgot to add source. Reverted changes, however. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.174.80.60 (talk) 23:26, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean, "Reverted changes, however"? As explained in my most recent edit summary, the source is needed to prove that the film is in production, not to prove that Moore's involved in it. Otherwise, for all we know, it could be falling under WP:CRYSTAL. 4TheWynne 23:37, 15 July 2017 (UTC)