User talk:81.97.18.158

August 2014

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Chicken Run does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history.

The edit summary appears in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list and
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! McDoobAU93 13:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm Doniago. I wanted to let you know that I undid your recent edits to the Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film) plot summary because they added a significant amount of unneeded detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- DonIago (talk) 13:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Incredibles may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:24, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Quest for Camelot may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Excalibur, Garrett gives it to Kayley to turn in herself, no longer feeling a part of that world ('''I Stand Alone (Reprise'''). He returns to the forest with Ayden and Kayley is captured moments

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

January 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Matilda (1996 film). Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your recent editing history at Matilda (1996 film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Binksternet (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Film plot size

Please see the guideline at WP:FILMPLOT which sets a maximum of 700 words for the plot section. When you are changing the wording of a plot section which is already at the maximum, you must remove some text if you wish to add some text. When I'm checking on the plot size I use one of these online tools. Binksternet (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at The Incredibles, you may be blocked from editing. Stop removing the note about film plot sizes just because you don't like it! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

CLG WIKI could are used as references

To be fair. They're will be used as references. No more reverting them. Good day sir! 81.97.18.158 (talk) 11:54, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikis are not considered reliable sources for articles. Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources for more information. Trivialist (talk) 00:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at TriStar Pictures, you may be blocked from editing. Wikis, such as the CLG Wiki cannot be used as reliable sources.

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices. King Shadeed 11:05, February 2, 2015 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia like you did at TriStar Pictures, you may be blocked from editing without further warning. You were told before not to use the CLG Wiki site as references, yet you ignored our warnings. Wiki sites CANNOT be used as references. If you want to use real references, go on Google or Bing and search for real references such the New York Times and Deadline. King Shadeed 22:32, February 3, 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

LISTEN! King Shadeed and Trivialist. I already explained to you I never put those references back on this page, after I deliberately disobeyed you first time when I put them on there on 29 and 31 January 2015. Which lead me to follow the policy for reliable sources. 1 and 3 February 2015, I only did the edits on the clouds' color, that is it!! Do you get it?! Why won't you listen?!! 81.97.18.158 (talk) 18:55, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

---