User talk:109.79.76.103
October 2020
[edit]
Hello, I'm Sundayclose. I noticed that you recently removed content from Mary Elizabeth Winstead without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 16:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
- You are mistaken. I did provide an edit summary and I will explain further in a moment on your talk page. -- 109.79.76.103 (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- I fixed the Rotten Tomatoes link. You then removed it. Please don't do that. Sundayclose (talk) 16:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- I fixed the ViewLondon link. You then removed it. Please don't do that.
- As I have explained on your talk page there is more to it than that, so please read my explanation first.
- We both should have checked the article history and checked the diffs more carefully, I commend the speed with which you fixed that dead link. I did not initially realize you had fixed the link in between the short time I tagged it as dead and then decided it was no longer necessary anyway, but again I hope you have read the longer explanation I provided on your talk page first. -- 109.79.76.103 (talk) 17:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Feel free to restore your legitimate edits, but don't remove the RT citation. There is no harm in leaving a reliable source. The easy way to do that would be to copy your edit changes with the exception of your removal of RT. It's up to you whether you do it the easy way or the hard way, but I'm not obligated to clean up your mistakes. By the way, RT is not a "lazy" source; it's a reliable source that is widely used on the vast majority of film and actor articles. Let me suggest that you spend your time improving the article instead of arguing with me. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Please move on. I suspect you have better things to do. I certainly do. Sundayclose (talk) 19:16, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- You say on your profile page that you edited as an anon IP for years but gave up and got an account. I went the other way.
- I want to improve the article. Sometimes that includes removing irrelevant unnecessary links but you want to keep it, then keep it but the article has other problems that need to be fixed and improving the articles is what is all about. -- 109.79.76.103 (talk) 19:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Please move on. I suspect you have better things to do. I certainly do. Sundayclose (talk) 19:16, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Feel free to restore your legitimate edits, but don't remove the RT citation. There is no harm in leaving a reliable source. The easy way to do that would be to copy your edit changes with the exception of your removal of RT. It's up to you whether you do it the easy way or the hard way, but I'm not obligated to clean up your mistakes. By the way, RT is not a "lazy" source; it's a reliable source that is widely used on the vast majority of film and actor articles. Let me suggest that you spend your time improving the article instead of arguing with me. Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- I fixed the Rotten Tomatoes link. You then removed it. Please don't do that. Sundayclose (talk) 16:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 | This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. |