User talk:24.141.5.202
 Hi, welcome to Wikisimpsons! Thanks for your edits to the Bobby Mindich article. We really appreciate your contributions here, and would love to give you credit! So Log in with a user name, or register one if you don't have one yet. That way we know who is doing the great things we see. Here's a wiki tip for you -- you can sign your name on talk/discussion pages by typing ~~~~ which automatically adds your signature and the date. Here are a few pages to help out new editors such as most likely yourself:
Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Solar Dragon (Talk • Contribs.) 15:34, November 11, 2013 (EST) |
Moving pages[edit]
Hello, Please in future, can you follow the correct procedure for moving pages. Firstly, Stick {{Moveto|<Name you want to move it to>}} at the top of the page. Secondly, put the reasoning why on the talk page. Thirdly, Wait for a user who has the ability to move articles to move it. What you have done is not only wiped the entire page history of the article, but it also makes it look like you were the sole editor of the article. Thank you, Solar Dragon (Talk • Contribs.) 15:34, November 11, 2013 (EST)
Warning[edit]
You have broken the only revert once policy by re-adding the information that was undone. This is your official warning. Breaking another policy will result in a short block. The Solar Dragon 13:43, November 23, 2013 (EST)
- Well Nick97 reverted more then once too, where is his warning? Also, hello, nice to meet you too. I thought there was a policy of not beating up on the newbie. 24.141.5.202 14:21, November 23, 2013 (EST)
- You broke the policy first. Oh, there's also no policy on not beating up on the newbie but I'm not doing that, just informing you of the policy. You should read through the policies before making any more edits. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 14:50, November 23, 2013 (EST)
- "Don't bite the newcomers!" is a guideline section on every TalkPage. Fine, "first" or whatever, the policy seems to be applied only to me and not Nick for doing exactly the same thing. Nick97 was first by reverting by my edit. Even I did, he should have stopped then rather then escalating it. It takes two to create an edit war. I apologize for creating for all this, but I still don't think the warning and the treat of blocking is very nice way to handle this (especially since Nick97 did it too, regardless of who started it) this is fair since I was editing in good faith and trying to be helpful. 24.141.5.202 15:04, November 23, 2013 (EST)
- Well, I'm not biting a newcomer. I'm explaining it all to you. Nick97 is a rollback, a trusted user. Someone I promoted, therefore I stand by his decision. Once his first undo/rollback was made, you should not have undid the undo. That is what broke the policy. Yes, he shouldn't have undone it again, it should have gone to the talk page, but he undid it again and took it to the talk page straight after, giving an explanation. That is what made it okay. You should have just contributed to the talk page discussion (as you are now) instead of adding it back in again. Okay, I probably shouldn't have threatened a block like that, I should have given you a chance to explain, and I apologize for that. The thing is, I just guess that I'm not used to unregistered users actually replying to talk page messages, it very rarely happens and so I wasn't actually expecting any sort of reply, I was mostly expecting you to just move on and not look back again. Most unregistered users have their edits undone as they are generally poor quality around here. Plus, I guess that most of the community (myself included, to some degree) are prejudiced against unregistered users and believe them to be "noobs" who don't really know what they're doing.
- Anyway, back to the point on hand, the article is about the book, solely about the book. Mentioning that it was made into a movie isn't within the page's scope, even if Glenn Close was in the movie. This is why it was removed.
- Anyway, if you want your edits to be taken more seriously around here, I would suggest that you create an account. It's easy to do and completely free. Your edits can also be attributed to you. IPs change, accounts do not. Thank you, The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 16:42, November 23, 2013 (EST)
- "Don't bite the newcomers!" is a guideline section on every TalkPage. Fine, "first" or whatever, the policy seems to be applied only to me and not Nick for doing exactly the same thing. Nick97 was first by reverting by my edit. Even I did, he should have stopped then rather then escalating it. It takes two to create an edit war. I apologize for creating for all this, but I still don't think the warning and the treat of blocking is very nice way to handle this (especially since Nick97 did it too, regardless of who started it) this is fair since I was editing in good faith and trying to be helpful. 24.141.5.202 15:04, November 23, 2013 (EST)
- You broke the policy first. Oh, there's also no policy on not beating up on the newbie but I'm not doing that, just informing you of the policy. You should read through the policies before making any more edits. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 14:50, November 23, 2013 (EST)
Royce Lumpkin[edit]
Your edit to the Royce Boss Hogg Lumpkin article was reverted because Royce doesn't appear in "Colonel Homer". The history with the characters is that Royce abandoned his family when Lurleen was a small child. When she stayed with the Simpsons in "Papa Don't Leech", the family learned that she missed her dad and Marge went to the trouble of tracking Royce down in order to reunite him and Lurleen. -- Mythigator (talk) 19:25, November 29, 2013 (EST)
- I'll check into the quote you cited. Assuming it's correct (which, BTW, I believe it is), it counts as Royce being mentioned, not appearing in the episode. -- Mythigator (talk) 03:37, December 2, 2013 (EST)
- I found a transcript of "Colonel Homer" which included the "everybody's calling" quote. With that detail confirmed, I've incorporated the information into Royce's article. Thanks for the catch! -- Mythigator (talk) 02:57, December 3, 2013 (EST)
Deceased In-Universe vs. Real Life[edit]
Regarding the status of real-world characters such as Ted Kennedy: Unless and until they are established in-universe as being dead, their status remains at "alive". That is a long-standing policy on the wiki and that is why AleWi reverted that particular edit of yours. (And why I reverted it again when you changed it back.) If you change it back again without opening a discussion on the topic, that WILL be construed as a violation of the "only revert once" rule and will most likely result in a block, since you've already been advised about the rule. -- Mythigator (talk) 03:37, December 2, 2013 (EST)
This is the discussion page for an anonymous user who has not created an account yet, or who does not use it. We therefore have to use the numerical IP address to identify them. Such an IP address can be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users.
