User talk:Lotsofsalt: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→June 2023: . |
{{Checkuserblock-account}}: User:ExVsSever |
||
| (30 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== |
==Indy 5== |
||
It's not a question of whether it belongs but rather whether it belongs in the [[WP:LEAD]]. The content you want included is already in the body, where it belongs. We don't include it in the lead because what was noteworthy about the film was its lack of success: it wasn't a huge critical hit in the first place, and the consensus in the press is that the movie is more known for being one of the most expensive films ever made, but being the worst-performing and worst received Indy movie. That is all the most noteworthy because this will be Ford's last Indy film and the expectations were high. Including your content in the lead is misleading as it reads like spin. Indy 5 is being referred to as one of the biggest box office misfires in history, especially disappointing given the amazing success of the past entries. It's like a prized undefeated boxer getting KOed in the first round of his final fight! |
|||
I reached out because you seem like a good contributor, and hoping you won't be editwar over this now considering you were just coming off of a ban for edit warring elsewhere. [[Special:Contributions/198.49.6.230|198.49.6.230]] ([[User talk:198.49.6.230|talk]]) 17:40, 19 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history at [[:Fantastic Four (2015 film)]] shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit war]]; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about [[WP:EPTALK|how this is done]]. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. |
|||
:I'll ignore the bizarre threat in the last sentence (which is ironic coming from an IP account) but saying "mixed reviews" isn't true, considering it has a 70% percent on Rotten Tomatoes. Mixed reviews would be in the low/mid 60's on RT and lower in the rotten category. |
|||
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|reverts]] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you do not violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> [[User:Sjones23|Lord Sjones23]] ([[User talk:Sjones23|talk]] - [[User:Sjones23/Wikipedia contributions|contributions]]) 07:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:The film being a box office flop is already in the lead, not exactly sure what you're getting at. The critical consensus in the lead is taken from the RT consensus, which we've done before. |
|||
:See Man of Steel for instance. |
|||
:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel_(film) |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
==Sock puppetry warning== |
|||
:Oh stop it. You're the one who keeps on reverting it for no reason, I haven't seen any other editor chime in except for you. |
|||
[[File:Ambox warning pn.svg|30px|link=]] You currently appear to be exhibiting [[WP:SIGNS]] of [[WP:SOCKPUPPET]]ry, according to the reverts you have made on [[:Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny]] and edits on pages involving Jewish history and figures, and another suspected account https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Humansandfish. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree by [[WP:GAMING]] the system. Users are expected to fairly reach [[Wikipedia:Consensus#In talk pages|collaborate]] with others, to avoid editing [[WP:Disruptive editing|disruptively]], and to [[WP:Consensus|try to reach a consensus]], rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. |
|||
:Again, we sum up reviews all the time in the opening page of the film. Why is this movie suddenly an exception? [[User:Lotsofsalt|Lotsofsalt]] ([[User talk:Lotsofsalt#top|talk]]) 07:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/2601:282:8980:C0F0:29B1:446A:9F02:2F3E|2601:282:8980:C0F0:29B1:446A:9F02:2F3E]] ([[User talk:2601:282:8980:C0F0:29B1:446A:9F02:2F3E|talk]]) 14:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC){{Tmbox |
|||
::[[MOS:FILMLEAD]] discourages exactly that: {{tq|Any summary of the film's critical reception should avoid [[WP:SYNTH|synthesis]], meaning it should reflect an overall consensus explicitly summarized by one or more reliable sources.|q=y}} The fact that many film articles ignore this guideline is irrelevant, see [[WP:OTHERCONTENT]]. [[User:Throast|Throast]] <sup style="font-size:.7em; line-height:1.5em;"><nowiki>{</nowiki><nowiki>{</nowiki>ping<nowiki>}}</nowiki> me!</sup> ([[User talk:Throast|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Throast|contribs]]) 15:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
| style = background: #f8eaba |
|||
:::Okay, so if I added several reliable reviews/sources to the statement as references, would that be fine? [[User:Lotsofsalt|Lotsofsalt]] ([[User talk:Lotsofsalt#top|talk]]) 16:36, 16 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
| image = [[File:Sock block.svg|55px]] |
|||
::::These would have to be sources that ''themselves'' sum up critical reviews, see [https://screenrant.com/halloween-ends-reviews-lament-mostly-unsatisfying-conclusion/ this] as an example. If you just added a bunch of critical reviews to support your own summary statement, that would be a clear case of [[WP:SYNTH|synthesis]], a form of [[WP:OR|original research]]. [[User:Throast|Throast]] <sup style="font-size:.7em; line-height:1.5em;"><nowiki>{</nowiki><nowiki>{</nowiki>ping<nowiki>}}</nowiki> me!</sup> ([[User talk:Throast|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Throast|contribs]]) |
|||
| text = '''''This account has been [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] indefinitely''''' as a [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry|sockpuppet]] of {{user21|ExVsSever}} that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Legitimate uses|allowed]], but using them for [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts|''illegitimate'']] reasons '''is not''', and that all edits made while evading a block or ban [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Evasion of blocks|may be reverted or deleted]]. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|appeal this block]] by first reading the [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]], then adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on the page, not as it appears in this edit area. --><code><nowiki>{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}</nowiki></code> below. [[User:NinjaRobotPirate|NinjaRobotPirate]] ([[User talk:NinjaRobotPirate|talk]]) 22:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)<!-- Template:SockBlock -->}} |
|||
:I see that you continue to violate [[WP:SYNTH]] in film articles. Please stop. [[User:Throast|Throast]] <sup style="font-size:.7em; line-height:1.5em;"><nowiki>{</nowiki><nowiki>{</nowiki>ping<nowiki>}}</nowiki> me!</sup> ([[User talk:Throast|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Throast|contribs]]) 09:37, 28 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
:::I'm talking about [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Raiders_of_the_Lost_Ark&diff=prev&oldid=1161916078#Reception this edit] where you added cherrypicked bits of praise ({{tq|Spielberg's direction, script, cinematography, John Williams score, and production design|q=y}}) to the lead section. This is precisely the type of synthesis I tried to explain to you earlier this month. You don't add summary statements of critical reviews without providing sources that do that type of analysis themselves. [[User:Throast|Throast]] <sup style="font-size:.7em; line-height:1.5em;"><nowiki>{</nowiki><nowiki>{</nowiki>ping<nowiki>}}</nowiki> me!</sup> ([[User talk:Throast|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Throast|contribs]]) 18:12, 28 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::I do apologize for [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Jurassic_Park_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=1162315980 this revert] tho. I thought you'd added "very"; you obviously did the opposite, rightly so. [[User:Throast|Throast]] <sup style="font-size:.7em; line-height:1.5em;"><nowiki>{</nowiki><nowiki>{</nowiki>ping<nowiki>}}</nowiki> me!</sup> ([[User talk:Throast|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Throast|contribs]]) 18:15, 28 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Almost a month later, and it continues to be an issue. See [[MOS:FILM]], [[WP:SYNTH]] and [[WP:ILCLUTTER]]. [[User talk:Nyxaros|<small style="font color:purple">ภץאคгöร</small>]] 19:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 22:26, 21 June 2024
Indy 5
[edit]It's not a question of whether it belongs but rather whether it belongs in the WP:LEAD. The content you want included is already in the body, where it belongs. We don't include it in the lead because what was noteworthy about the film was its lack of success: it wasn't a huge critical hit in the first place, and the consensus in the press is that the movie is more known for being one of the most expensive films ever made, but being the worst-performing and worst received Indy movie. That is all the most noteworthy because this will be Ford's last Indy film and the expectations were high. Including your content in the lead is misleading as it reads like spin. Indy 5 is being referred to as one of the biggest box office misfires in history, especially disappointing given the amazing success of the past entries. It's like a prized undefeated boxer getting KOed in the first round of his final fight!
I reached out because you seem like a good contributor, and hoping you won't be editwar over this now considering you were just coming off of a ban for edit warring elsewhere. 198.49.6.230 (talk) 17:40, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'll ignore the bizarre threat in the last sentence (which is ironic coming from an IP account) but saying "mixed reviews" isn't true, considering it has a 70% percent on Rotten Tomatoes. Mixed reviews would be in the low/mid 60's on RT and lower in the rotten category.
- The film being a box office flop is already in the lead, not exactly sure what you're getting at. The critical consensus in the lead is taken from the RT consensus, which we've done before.
- See Man of Steel for instance.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Steel_(film)
- Previously, there was an edit war with DOD about whether it got "mostly positive reviews" or "mixed reviews," so the RT consensus was used instead. Lotsofsalt (talk) 23:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Sock puppetry warning
[edit]
You currently appear to be exhibiting WP:SIGNS of WP:SOCKPUPPETry, according to the reverts you have made on Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny and edits on pages involving Jewish history and figures, and another suspected account https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Humansandfish. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree by WP:GAMING the system. Users are expected to fairly reach collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
2601:282:8980:C0F0:29B1:446A:9F02:2F3E (talk) 14:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 | This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of ExVsSever (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |