User talk:King Shadeed

Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the coolest online encyclopedia I know of =). I sure hope you stick around; we're always in need of more people to create new articles and improve the ones we already have. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines. First, write from a neutral point of view, second, be bold in editing pages, and third, use wikiquette. Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.

Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me at my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing ~~~~.

Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! --Spangineer (háblame) 14:20, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Taking a month off

After that chaos that I've experienced here, I'm taking a month off, so I won't be back until April 17. I hope everyone understands. And thanks to those who helped me out during that sock puppet situation. PEACE!! King Shadeed 21:30, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

@Bishonen: Hmm, userpage protection might be a good idea too [1]. -- Orduin ^Discuss 21:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I meant to keep an eye on that. Thanks for reminding me, Orduin. I've blocked the whole 75.169.16.0/20 range (no useful contributions from it), but I might as well protect the userpage too. Done. Have a nice break, King Shadeed. Your contributions are appreciated. Bishonen | talk 21:39, 18 March 2015 (UTC).

Returned

Break's over. King Shadeed 00:14, April 17, 2015 (UTC)

Fox Television Studios category

User:King Shadeed, a couple of years ago, you have suggested that the category be named after "20th Century Fox Television" rather than "Fox Television Studios". I was unsure why it was named after FTS, and as of December 2014, FTS no longer exists, having been merged with Fox 21 to become "Fox 21 Television Studios". Because of this, I have started this CfD entry to have the category renamed after 20th Century Fox Television. Jim856796 (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Great idea and thanks for that. King Shadeed 23:51, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

The article for Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group...

I tried utilizing whatever references to "Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group" I could find on Sony Pictures's website in order to make the case on Columbia TriStar's talk page for a page name change from the page's current name to "Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group"; however, user Betty Logan has seen fit to oppose the change simply because NO news organization has reported on the name change. If you need more info, take a look at her argument yourself. I figured that, since you've decided to support the changing of the references to the film studios group from Columbia TriStar MPG to Sony Pictures MPG, maybe you can help out with the argument in favor of the page name change. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 05:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

REALLY??! We shall see. King Shadeed 01:38, June 19, 2015 (UTC)

Well, since you've shown Betty quite a number of references detailing the change from Columbia TriStar MPG to Sony Pictures MPG, using those references, maybe you can make the necessary changes to the article to reflect the status of the new organization of the company. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 01:31, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Let's not jump the gun as of yet. Betty still believes for some reason that SPMPG is a fake name and is still known as the CTMPG. King Shadeed 01:05, June 20, 2015 (UTC)

I don't know enough about Sony or have a strong enough opinion to get involved, so I'm going to defer to Betty Logan for now, as she usually knows what she's talking about. Trivialist (talk) 11:41, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

The funny thing is, what Betty's accusing you of (misinterpreting the sources provided) is almost the same exact thing two editors accused me of doing as it concerns the article for Star Television Network (originally Starcast, then STN, & finally just Star). I simply put forth what the references for Star were implying (the network started out with the "Starcast" public branding, then switched to "STN", & finally stuck with just "Star"), yet I was accused of misinterpreting what those references were saying, even though the other two editors were able to see for themselves the wording within the references (and that wording completely backed me up). However, the other two editors were unwilling to admit that I was right, so I had to end up giving up on the "fight" & walking away from it. So, maybe when you have the time, you can look through the debate/argument on the talk page for Star, then reply here with your viewpoint on the "fight" & if you think my interpretation of the references for Star is correct. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Wow! I see what ya mean! Sheesh! King Shadeed 20:36, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Well then, if that's your way of saying my interpretation of the references (especially concerning Star's public/common branding) in the article for Star is indeed/in fact correct, maybe you can intervene/get involved in the "fight" on Star's talk page yourself & help back up my stance concerning the history of Star's public/common branding (that it started out as Starcast, then changed to STN, & finally ended up as just Star).

I mean, the two YouTube videos I linked to in one of my statements PROVE that Star's public/common branding towards the end was indeed "Star" (kinda like how for CBS Broadcasting, it's "CBS"; for NBCUniversal, it's "NBC"; for American Broadcasting Companies, it's "ABC"; & for Fox Broadcasting Company, it's "FOX"). And, the multiple news articles cited in the Star article clearly state Star's public brandings as being "Starcast" first, then "STN", & finally just "Star".

So, if you're game, I would appreciate your intervention/involvement in the "fight" on Star's talk page to help swing the "fight" back in my favor. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 04:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hang on. YouTube videos can't be used for references. Do what I do. Dig up your info by looking on Google or Bing. Dig deep if you have to. I'll do my best to help in the meantime. King Shadeed 14:00, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Actually, according to WP:YOUTUBE, both you & the user on Star's talk page that said that are wrong. The "YouTube videos as references" section doesn't actually say YouTube videos can't be used, only that

editors need to watch out for the potential unreliability of the user uploading the video.

which is why I used the two or so videos in one of my statements. And, I tried doing both a Google & Bing search for Star Television Network, but most of the results are for the 21st Century Fox-owned STAR Television. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 22:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh HOOOO! So THAT'S it! I thought all this long time they were unacceptable?? Makes sense now! King Shadeed 09:36, June 28, 2015 (UTC)

Well, took a second look at the section, & some of the wording seems weird:

YouTube and similar sites do not have editorial oversight engaged in scrutinizing content so editors need to watch out for the potential unreliability of the user uploading the video.

YET.....

Anyone can create a website or video and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For this reason self-published media as seen on YouTube are often not acceptable sources. Self-published videos may be used as sources of information about their creator if they meet the requirements seen at restrictions on using self-published sources.

Editors should also consider if the content being referenced is truly encyclopedic if the best citation that can be made points to YouTube.

That sounds like contradictory wording to me. So, which is it: does Wikipedia accept YouTube videos as references, or doesn't it? 76.235.248.47 (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Things gotta get corrected with that. I think I might know who to ask. King Shadeed 19:16, June 29, 2015 (UTC)

While you're doing that, maybe you could also take a look at the wording of the news articles cited in Star's article & then tell me here if the references to the network's name in those news articles (starting with each news article's second network reference) would be considered the network's common/public branding.

Honestly, I'm kind of almost thinking that maybe the BEST way to prove to the other two editors for Star's article that (as far as stances on what the network's common/public branding is) I was right & they were wrong all along is to take the sentence from each news article that contains that article's first reference to the network's common/public branding (usually the second network reference in a news article) & use that sentence within the quote function of the news article citation template within Wikipedia's citation tool. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 07:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

So, could I get your help/opinion on the situation with the article for Star Television Network? 76.235.248.47 (talk) 22:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sunset Gower Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Facts of Life (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Move review for Columbia TriStar MPG...

Hey, might wanna check this out, in case you want to input anything. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 07:30, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I saw it weeks ago. King Shadeed 13:42, July 24, 2015 (UTC)

You know WHAT?? MY fault! I thought it was under the CTMPG talk. King Shadeed 18:39, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

Well, if you saw it weeks ago, why didn't you get involved in it? I mean, you decided to get involved in the move request. Why not in the move review? But, thanks to you, I was essentially left to fend for myself in the review. As a result, due to those who DID get involved in the review, the consensus (that thing Cuchullain, the move request's closer, misinterpreted concerning the move request) turned out to be overwhelming support for Cuchullain's misinterpretation of the result of the move request.

So, in the end, I figured that, since I couldn't get any of the participants of the move review on my side (apparently proving Wikipedia's full of idiots) & it apparently seems like NONE of them bothered to examine the evidence you had presented about Sony Pictures replacing Columbia TriStar, I had NO OTHER CHOICE but to withdraw my nomination of Columbia TriStar MPG for move review. In fact, I was given the advice/suggestion of waiting a few months to do a move review, as well as putting forth a better nomination of Columbia TriStar for a move review (me finding the latter suggestion rather rude). 76.235.248.47 (talk) 06:17, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Hold it. I found another link that said "Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group" from 2013. And I believe the "One Sony" could be the reason for it. King Shadeed 02:39, August 1, 2015 (UTC)

Would love to see the 2013 link that references Sony Pictures MPG. And, as far as the "One Sony", could you elaborate on what you're talking about? 76.235.248.47 (talk) 07:24, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

The "One Sony" strategy was suggested by Kazuo Hirai, to bring all Sony companies under one roof and to turn Sony around after they've had troubles.

• Source here
• This source mentions the name "Sony Pictures Entertainment Motion Picture Group". Dates back Dec. 6, 2013. King Shadeed 22:22, August 3, 2015 (UTC)

Well, it seems like the only way to satisfy Betty & the others, as far as the name change for Columbia TriStar, is to find something that references the name change from Columbia TriStar to Sony Pictures MPG. Otherwise, they're going to continue to stick to saying that nothing shows Columbia TriStar having become Sony Pictures MPG. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 22:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

But they have nothing to prove that the name "Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group" still exists as of this year. If they would stop being so skeptic and put two-and-two together, then they have their answer. King Shadeed 21:48, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

Well, while it's true that Columbia TriStar is no more & the studios group is now Sony Pictures MPG, the problem is that, from my own research, there unfortunately is nothing (no news articles or whatever else) that actually states that Columbia TriStar has become Sony Pictures MPG or that Sony Pictures MPG has replaced Columbia TriStar, which, from my interpretation, seems to be the point that Betty was making as a response to my move request. The Sony Pictures article you posted does reference the studio group as Sony Pictures MPG, but then again, it doesn't say that Sony Pictures MPG has replaced Columbia TriStar or that Columbia TriStar was renamed to Sony Pictures MPG.

So, it would seem the rather ironic truth in this case is....I'm actually starting to see where Betty & the others are coming from. I mean, if someone told me that a company had changed it's name or been replaced by another company, I'd want proof of the replacement or name change happening.

So, I suppose the only solution to this situation might be to see if Sony can be contacted & if so, ask them to issue some sort of press/news release that clarifies whether Columbia TriStar has been renamed to Sony Pictures MPG or if Columbia TriStar has been replaced by Sony Pictures MPG. Once Sony has put out the information we're looking for, action can then be taken to rename the article for Columbia TriStar to Sony Pictures MPG. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 02:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

The thing is, it was the restructuring SPE had been through. King Shadeed 23:00, August 4, 2015 (UTC)

But, the thing is, is there anything (news article, press release, etc.) that specifically mentions or references whatever it is that happened to Columbia TriStar or SPE? If something like that can be found, Betty & the others will no longer have reason to oppose a move request for Columbia TriStar. So, what needs to be found is a press release, news article, something that talks about what happened to Columbia TriStar or SPE. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 03:11, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm still digging into that as we speak. King Shadeed 23:47, August 5, 2015 (UTC)

I've been inactive for a while focusing on life. I believe I've got something. I've been looking up SPE's press releases in late 2013. It looks like September was the last month to mention "Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group" because I don't see it on October to December.

• See here King Shadeed 14:23, August 17, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I think everyone on Wikipedia understands that people have a life outside of the internet.

But, anyway, after checking the press releases for 2013, in this one for Oct 9, it lists someone as the contact for "Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group". In this one for Dec 6, it references the film studios group as "Sony Pictures Entertainment Motion Pictures Group". In the other releases, when it refers to a film studio, it specifically mentions Columbia Pictures. Of course, they all seem to mention Sony Pictures Entertainment. So, I'm still unsure as to how we're going to find proof/evidence that suggests that Sony Pictures MPG has replaced Columbia TriStar. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 04:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, the better way to find out is to investigate news from October to December 2013. King Shadeed 13:51, August 20, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I decided to do some Google searches, and in the results that came up, quite a few of the news articles between October & December 2013 referring to the film studios group referred to it as Sony Pictures Entertainment Motion Pictures Group, Sony Entertainment Motion Picture Group, Sony Motion Picture Group, or still referring to it as Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group, with maybe only one reference to Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group. To be quite honest, it's kinda looking like that we might not be able to find any sort of news article talking about the name change or press release from Sony mentioning the name change.

So, while the website for Sony's filmed entertainment division itself refers to the film studios group as Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group, there's nothing that references/mentions ANYTHING about the change from Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group to Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group.

Honestly, from my point of view, it may just be best for now to take any reference to the film studios group & revert it back to Columbia TriStar, rather than leaving it at Sony Pictures MPG. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 10:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Show me what did you find. The one I found before they've used the name SPMPG from Dec. 2013, was that they've united the boards to prepare the release of The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They might as well stick with SPMPG, because sources link to the name. We can STILL look for the references to see when it was renamed. King Shadeed 18:27, September 1, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I tried doing my search again & then realized that when I initially did the search using (Month) 2013 (studio name), I wasn't paying attention to the dates stated on the news articles. So, apparently, I spoke without confirming whether or not what I stated was actually true or not. So, my bad. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and what's the one you found from Dec. 2013 about uniting whatever boards? 76.235.248.47 (talk) 04:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

This one I found said they've united their broad and diverse platforms. This may not count. Read it and see. King Shadeed 18:17, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

I looked at the press release & there's no mention of the film studios group or its branding. So, yeah, I'm pretty sure it doesn't count. And, again, with the way things are looking, we probably won't be able to find anything that implies Sony Pictures MPG replaced Columbia TriStar as SPE's film studios group. So, unless we can get more people to agree to rename the article for Columbia TriStar to Sony Pictures MPG, probably just better off reverting any references to the film studios group back to Columbia TriStar. At this point, we've found NOTHING proving that Sony Pictures MPG is the replacement for Columbia TriStar. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 11:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

It looks like December 2013 may be it, because I can't find anything from November 2013, yet. King Shadeed 18:56, September 9, 2015 (UTC)

If you're referring to the Dec. 2013 article you posted, please refer to my most recent comment.

So, it pretty much seems like the entire debate centers on being able to find something that references/mentions/chronicles Columbia TriStar being replaced by Sony Pictures MPG. And, since it's seeming (for now) that we're not able to find anything that confirms Sony Pictures MPG replacing Columbia TriStar, as I previously stated, it might just be better off reverting any references/mentions of the film studios group back to Columbia TriStar. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 04:32, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Eh, it wouldn't do much good anyway since it would be counted as a waste of effort. Tell me, have any of those debaters found anything?? And I think all of this has to do with Sony's reorganization as of summer 2013. King Shadeed 19:21, September 10, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I checked the talk page for Columbia TriStar, and all that's there is: 1) the debate over the name change & 2) the move review. But, I don't think that any of the other debaters are going to try & look for anything that talks about Columbia TriStar's name change. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 02:42, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Heh! I guess not for THEIR case! They're so desperate to change it back to the "Columbia TriStar Motion Picture Group" so bad, knowing that the sources I've found that states "Sony Pictures Motion Picture Group" even if we can't find the proper source indicating SPE renamed CTMPG to SPMPG yet. They'll have to stick with what I got for right now! King Shadeed 14:41, September 13, 2015 (UTC)

Well, even with what you've found, I think the key factor in this debate/argument is being able to find something, anything, that shows/documents SPMPG having replaced CTMPG as SPE's film studio group. Unless THAT proof can be found, we don't really have that much of a case, even if it's MORE of a case than they have. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Something I've found weeks ago. It looks as though the name SPMPG existed BEFORE the 2010s! I've looked up sources on Variety and several news sources stated the name in 1993! King Shadeed 11:34, October 21, 2015 (UTC)

Well, unless you can find something that mentions a name change, we STILL really don't have much of a case. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 22:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Where's that link discussion?? And here's one I found dated in November 2013. It looks like December wasn't it after all. It's possible it was October. More to be dug up. King Shadeed 14:17, November 9, 2015 (UTC)

About Austin Alexander

Sorry to interfering you but just let me know what happened to him when he's harming you and can you tell me reason why so I can report it to my account, Thank you :-)

JBFan4 (talk) 01:06, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I've been dealing with him for a VERY long time! He had the nerve to attack me ON here by using an IP account. King Shadeed 22:20, July 30, 2015 (UTC)

Re: CPT and Barnaby Jones

Just finished reading the Broadcasting article and it turns out you were right about CPT syndicating Barnaby Jones outside the US at the time, so my apologies. I've already added the link for the PDF you provided at the CPT article under the 1974-1982 subheading of the History section, if that's not a problem. Creativity-II (talk) 04:32, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. But it's better to use the format on how Broadcasting want us to use it on how I've used for the past few years to avoid trouble like that. King Shadeed 18:19, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

Someone's vandalizing TriStar Pictures!

When I saw the page TriStar Pictures. Someone had vandalized it by adding the 2014 logo at the top where it should have be in the logo section!!! Can you sort that troublesome Wikia contributor out? 81.97.18.158 (talk) 18:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:King Shadeed/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello! King Shadeed, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Sony Pictures Entertainment

The information added might be correct, but the edit summary for adding it was "fixed grammar", which is a false edit summary. Edward321 (talk) 05:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. You still should've corrected that instead of reverting it. And two, you should've looked up the information. King Shadeed 0:02, June 26, 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, King Shadeed. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Defstar Records

Concerning this: [2]. 1. "株式会社" means "Inc." 2. Your version looks confusing and has several brackets in a row. --Moscow Connection (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

It's called a parenthesis, not a bracket. Brackets are this: "[]". And HOW can you tell me to stop edit warring and edit warring is breaking the three revert rule? I've reverted once, you've reverted twice! So how's THAT edit warring??? You assumed that I was edit warring, right or wrong? King Shadeed 19:15, December 29, 2016 (UTC)

I just meant that in my opinion you were the one who started it (some kind of an edit war or whatever) cause you reverted my revert. (Actually, I partially reverted/corrected and expained why, and then you returned it to your exact previous version again.)
Anyway, what I want to say is that now it looks more logical cause it says "Defstar Records Inc." and then the same thing in Japanese. And it is more readable.
Thank you for explaining what brackets are. (Now I've looked at the Wikipedia article and it actually says that parenteses are "round brackets". So I guess it's okay to call them brackets after all.)
Sorry for bothering you. I don't really care about the double parentheses etc., but I still think my version is better... You can correct/improve it again if you like. --Moscow Connection (talk) 00:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Sony Music template

Hello. Please monitor Template:Sony Music as false info has been inserted in that template. Sony Music NEVER owned EMI Records although Sony/ATV Music Publishing did acquire controlling interest in EMI Music Publishing. Steelbeard1 (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. I'll do so. King Shadeed 20:48, May 15, 2017 (UTC)

July 2017

Your recent editing history at Sony Pictures Television 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 are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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. TJH2018talk 19:11, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Go to your talk page. King Shadeed 13:14, July 26, 2017 (UTC)

Corrected the show titles.

I would like to correct the List of Gunsmoke television episodes#Nielsen ratings that the show titles make nonsense. It was It Takes a Thief, not The Robert Wagner Show. Similarity, the show title that should be corrected was The Magician, not The Bill Bixby Show. Similarity, Nanny and the Professor end its run on December 13, 1971, replacing it with Monday Night Special, beginning December 20, 1971. As also stated, The Hollywood Palace started its run on January 4, 1964. --2601:C8:C001:9AF0:81E7:7D05:B95B:11D0 (talk) 02:36, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

King Shadeed, I agree. --2601:C8:C001:9AF0:359B:FDC1:80C1:F23E (talk) 02:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

TTTEfan2017's message

Dear; King Shadeed remember when you thanked me for editing Sony Wonder. Can you edit HiT Entertainment and tell Spshu and give him a message that Wikipedia is free for everyone to edit and you send me a thank you message bye bye.