User talk:Yoshiarecool
November 2007
[edit]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Feces. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jaysweet 18:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Reply
[edit]WP:NOR says No original research, which forbids use of cultural references sections. The page as it stands right now is filled with minor references and mentions with no sources at all. Which page do you think is better: A Streetcar Named Marge which has sources, or that one? But to answer your question, yes, I think removing all of the unsourced stuff is worth it. And if you think it isn't I suggest going to the Simpsons Wiki. -- Scorpion0422 01:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- Can you at least agree to remove the goofs section and the minor references and mentions? I have no problems with cultural references sections when they have sources, but in this case there are none (yet). -- Scorpion0422 01:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- Then I suggest you try reading WP:OTHERSTUFFAIN'TSOURCEDANDTHISISSOOOOOBVIOUSIFYOU'REAFAN. You'll quickly find that you are going against policy on the issue and the stuff will be removed eventually. Again, would you rather see pages like Cape Feare or sloppy unsourced messes like Funeral for a Fiend? -- Scorpion0422 02:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
If you are a fan of The Simpsons, then wouldn't it be more help to make all of the related pages as good and encyclopedic as possible? Wikipedia is supposed to be informative, but it is also meant to present information in an organized manner. WP:NOR and WP:TRIVIA go against cultural references sections, but we try and meet the policy halfway by only including 5-10 of the more notable references and trying to source them.
If you actually are interested in helping to improve Wikipedia's Simpsons related content, then I suggest visiting this page. However if you just want to make all pages a jumble of disorganized OR, then perhaps you really should try the Simpsons Wiki. -- Scorpion0422 02:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Imaginationland Episode II. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Dlong (talk) 05:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
December 2007
[edit] Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you.Ctjf83 talk 02:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ctjf83 talk 02:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind, you will be blocked from editing. Ctjf83 talk 00:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- If you feel it should be added, you need to discus it on the the talk page we already have a discussion going there Ctjf83 talk 00:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- they are hardly threats...they are legitimate templates, that anyone is allowed to use. No, I can't specifically block you, but an admin can upon seeing all your unsourced edits to the article. If you have a problem with them not being added, go to the talk page, which i linked on your talk page, and discus it with the rest of us. BTW, when you post, remember to sign them by typing ~~~~ Ctjf83 talk 00:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I should mention you have to use templates like that legitimately Ctjf83 talk 00:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- they are hardly threats...they are legitimate templates, that anyone is allowed to use. No, I can't specifically block you, but an admin can upon seeing all your unsourced edits to the article. If you have a problem with them not being added, go to the talk page, which i linked on your talk page, and discus it with the rest of us. BTW, when you post, remember to sign them by typing ~~~~ Ctjf83 talk 00:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)