Jump to content

User talk:4TheWynne/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Chloë Grace Moretz filmography

Information icon Hello! I noticed that in this edit you used the summary, "Source not needed; says "Alina/Teri" in the film's article". Please be aware that Wikipedia cannot cite itself. Instead, I have found and added a new, proper source for the data. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 21:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't trying to make it sound like Wikipedia could cite itself – I just didn't see any other references next to character names throughout Chloë's filmography, so I opted to remove it and simply mirror what it said in the film's article. But hopefully that clears things up. Anyway, thanks for letting me know! Regards, 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 22:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
No problem! —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 00:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I just noticed that I skimmed over your reply and missed a very good point that you brought up: the other character names aren't cited. In most cases (as it should be, where possible), they can be confirmed by clicking on the ref url in the article's body. In this case, it's a character who uses a street name, and the ref included didn't reflect that. IMHO, that required a citation. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 20:28, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

What the hell?

Your edits are mostly on your own page, your edits are tisruptive and you go in revert wars, I don't like that kind of attitude - would you stop disrupting people's work and stop relying on Wikipedia as a weblog rather than a serious web-encyclopedia vehicle? You are youngling, and you don't do shit rather than go in revert wars and edit your topblog userpage. I also tended to do much work on my UserPage, but that was mostly to project my interests and their impact on Wikipedia. Not to revert other people's work. Start act seriously otherwise it says bad.

The Mad Hatter (talk)
What you're saying makes absolutely no sense. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 00:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Nikki Reed

I edited the Nikki Reed page for her divorce finalized date and you changed it. I read your reference article but it didn't list an actual date for their divorce. The article I found lists the 26th of December as the date. I was wondering why you changed it. Livsmommy81 (talk) 15:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Timeline size

Hi there. When I typed "correct" size, I meant correct as in change. It was discussed previously (cannot recall where) but 1000 is too wide for many screens, 800 caters for all. Cheers.--Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 06:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing. Only thing I had against it was that all timelines that I edit/create are 1000. My screen is neither big nor wide, and 1000 is nowhere near too big for it. I just thought you might have been referring to mobile screens or something, and I have always felt that 800 is too small. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 06:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Default screen size on Windows XP computers with 4:3 screens was 800*600, and the largest size possible was 1024*768. So in these respects, it would be more ideal to use 800. I know people shouldn't be on 4:3 computers these days, but unfortunately that's how it ends up. Vortiene (talk) 13:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I see. I guess that's something else that will have to be brought up in the future. Thanks for the heads-up, though. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 13:16, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Hugh Jackman issue

Hi, I do not deal too much with user disputes but I know that we can have an impartial third editor take a look at the content dispute and render a (nonbinding) opinion, per WP:3. There are more serious alternatives like the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, but I am not sure that would be very useful since the user has stopped commenting on the Hugh Jackman talk page. I don't think the user has technically violated WP:3RR yet but if he does, then he could potentially be blocked for disruptive editing. If that is the case, there is this page to check out. Hope that helps a bit! wia (talk) 11:39, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't deal too much with user disputes either, and for that, I appreciate your suggestions. Thanks – 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 11:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
I've replied on Roarkp's talk page with some suggestions for more constructive editing, including some articles he could read to help him craft a sentence that will fit well into the article. Hopefully that will obviate the need for any dispute resolution! wia (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Template:Prototype (band) has been accepted

Template:Prototype (band), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Template-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

—CraigyDavi (T∙C∙@) 10:26, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Linkin Park tours

Friend, why aren't the tours not important for the article. Have a look at the articles of Eminem and Thirty Seconds to Mars. Mike:Golu · [ Confidential message ] 09:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Irrelevant. You don't see the articles of Metallica or Machine Head listing their tours, do you? My point is, the tours aren't something that is essential to the article, like the band members or discography would be. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 10:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Linkin Park Infobox

I partially revered your edit to the Linkin Park article pertaining to the member order specified in the Infobox. I feel I owe you an explanation. Per Template:Infobox musical artist#current_members, the standard documentation states that we should list band members by 'order of joining' and then alphabetical order. While I agree with your edits to standardize the order of band member sections, there is already a written guideline that defines the order we should use for bandmates in the infobox. Thank you for your time. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  04:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it much of a partial revert, more that two of the members weren't in the right order even after I tried to fix it, and you saw to that. I knew that the guideline existed, but not that members that started at the same time were to be listed in alphabetical order. Thanks for taking the time to let me know, and I'll keep that in mind for next time. Other than that, thanks for your support! Regards, 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 04:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

James Hird years

Hi there, It is the normal practice to use AFL season dates as the relevant years in the infobox - ie Ross Lyon is listed as being at St Kilda until 2011, Freo from 2012, not both in 2011, despite being recruited in September 2011. Showing that he missed the 2014 season is much more accurate and informative than saying he coached continually from 2011. Also, I didn't mean to hit the revert button, but the screen links jumped as I went to click the undo button, so I was unable to explain this in the edit summary. The-Pope (talk) 09:18, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, you were too quick for me. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 09:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Machine Head albums

I strongly disagree. Nu metal was the last strongly successful push of metal into the mainstream. According to records shown by the discography page, they seem to suggest that The Burning Red brought the most success so far. I may, however, still be incorrect, so I will not re-add my edit due to this dispute. I wanted to just state my opinion, even if it doesn't change anything. Thank you for your time. DannyMusicEditor (talk) 18:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate you coming forward and having your say. Here's what I have to say about it, though: The Blackening earned Machine Head their first Grammy Award nomination and a greater fan following which, with the help of social media, continued with Unto the Locust and Bloodstone & Diamonds, and they "would not have success until later albums". That's basically what I managed to decipher from the lead, and I highly doubt that it was referring to their nu metal albums. And looking at the discography page, regardless of the sales, the chart positions for the three aforementioned albums are significantly higher. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 05:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Furious 7 – working on expansion of Filming section

Don't worry; I haven't changed anything on you again! I'm just trying to garner your advice. I'm working on expanding the Filming section of the Furious 7 article, with more information on production, etc.; when which scenes were filmed and where. It'd be similar to the Filming section in the article for The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, the information in which I did most of the research for (and which I am still very proud of). Unlike that article, however, the sources I've gathered for this one -- but have not yet implemented -- come from completely different places: Filming notices, B-roll footage with clapperboard dates, interviews with certain members of the cast, casting calls, and, strangest of all, Twitter -- specific Tweets from James Wan, Dwayne Johnson, Ronda Rousey, and John Brotherton being some of the ones I've collated.

Due to the wide range of sources, I am sort of at a loss as to how to properly cite each one -- especially the Twitter tweets and B-roll footage (which is up on YouTube). I started to put up info from the second week of the Georgia shoot a week or two ago, but at the moment I'd like your advice on how to proceed. Stolengood (talk) 07:17, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Sure thing – show me some of what you've got, and I'll be happy to see what we can do with them. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 07:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
I've got like 12 or more tabs open with the various things; I just need help citing it. How exactly do you cite a tweet on here, much less a specific timestamp on a YouTube video? :-/ Stolengood (talk) 21:03, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Find Dwayne Johnson's character's description in the cast section. There should be a sourced tweet at the end of the paragraph, so for now, we'll assume that that's the way to go in regards to sourcing Twitter. In regards to sourcing YouTube, though – and I've seen this done in several ways, but none of them seem to be right – for now, just throw in the URL and complete as many of the reference criteria (e.g. title, date, etc.) as you can. Also, might I suggest leaving a space between your comments, just as I do? It just makes it easier for me to find the specific comments, that's all, and I'm sure others will agree. Thanks – 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 22:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Natalie Portman - Country of birth

Could you please explain to me why you keep reverting an edit that I made to the article on Natalie Portman. Could you please address the relevant section in the Talk page, rather than make instantaneous deletions. Please note that Ms. Portman is noted as being "Israeli-born" in the main article, so why do you keep deleting the same fact in the info-box??? Barmispain (talk) 08:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Look, I reverted your edit a second time (as I'm sure anyone else would have) because you hadn't reached a consensus on the point that I know you were trying to make. Simply starting a section at the relevant talk page and not waiting for other editors to respond before re-implementing the edit in question isn't going to cut it. I would wait until you start discussing properly, and I don't even need to involve myself in all of this. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 08:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting me there

I had mistakenly thought I was on the video game's page. Thanks for pointing that out.--Taeyebaar (talk) 05:25, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

No worries. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 11:45, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

If mentioning to this issue (being widely regarded as sexually attractive) is not appropriate n its non-noteworthy trivia so why is this mentioned in other actors bio? for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Depp Set fire 2 de rain (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Rise Against

I dont think think that they are melodic hardcore dude they are mostly punk rock

Wonderdisk 93 (talk) 23:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

That's very opinionative of you. I'm guessing you're the one who was at the page before, and have finally decided to create an account. Well, in that case, would you like to take this up at the talk page properly (instead of just repeating what you've said here)? Having gone through WWIII for this article, all due to a single four-digit number, I'd be quite happy to discuss things there again. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 03:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Dude i know that but my point is that they are alright just listen to one of their song for example alright just were they sing about animal rights that what makes them punk rock just look and listen to the music video dude so what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jg9443 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Dude i know that but my point is that they are alright just listen to one of their song for example alright just were they sing about animal rights that what makes them punk rock just look and listen to the music video dude so what you think.Jg9443 (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Just to let you know if you change i change it as well this would stop until you just leave it to punk rock and that"s it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jg9443 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I apologize for my threats i had about 3 days to think about it i am deeply sorry is that i felt that i really thought they were punk rock and my begging and pleading for that i am sorry i am being the bigger man here dude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jg9443 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Jg9443 (talk · contribs), in this case at least, apologising doesn't make you "the bigger man", "dude". You do the wrong thing, you do the time. That's how it works around here. And making threats was just one of those things, regardless of what you "felt that you really thought". Anyway, hopefully you will start to make better decisions and make proper contributions here. Clean up your act. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 12:21, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

sorry to bother you i just wanted to let you know just look at their music videos and albums their in the punk rock community and i will give to you they are melodic hardcore songs in them but it does not mean that i am begging if you can look them up their music and albums please just look it up.Jg9443 (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Jg9443 (talk · contribs), you know what, rather than try and be the voice of reason like I always do, go to the Rise Against talk page and discuss your views with Realpunkmusic (talk · contribs), who disagrees with you completely. I actually follow the band very closely, and I know all about their music – what you're saying is entirely opinionative, and I'm sick of hearing it. Now, go to the talk page, and stop bothering me about this. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 02:02, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

dude i was wondering if i have your permission to move your article?Jg9443 (talk) 01:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean? 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 03:03, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

not trying to edit i am just asking dude.Jg9443 (talk) 10:51, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

look dude sorry again i get emotional is that i love this band i believe that they are punk rock and somtimes i admit that i could be a bit stubborn Jg9443 (talk) 23:55, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Jg9443 (talk · contribs), I've reverted your edits to other relevant pages where you've left your imprint, and although I left a message on your own talk page, you still choose to state your opinion wherever you want without presenting any sources, or any real evidence, and I would be changing that in a hurry if I were you. Otherwise, there's no point continuing this discussion. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 01:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Dude you said that i have to get evidence to prove that they are punk rock here it is help is on the way and i dont want to be here anymore and give it all i dont have the music videos to send you a link but i hope you seen the music video just like rise against famous punk rock bands talk and support animal and human rights just as anti flag ,minor threat, against me, nofx rise against and much more those are my evidence if you want you can look up political punk rock bands.Jg9443 (talk) 04:42, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

dude i have left something on your talk page i have got evidence.Jg9443 (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

just asking if i come up with a solution that my version of rise against in simple wikipedia if i can move it to your article and you can put your article in my simple wikipedia articleJg9443 (talk) 17:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

liam neeson

Why remove what i edited? It was incorrect before and now you have made it incorrect again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.223.234.58 (talk) 09:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Fast 8

Hello 4TheWynne! I redirected the page Fast 8 back to Furious 7 per WP:NFF. Please do not create the page again until the filming begins on the project. And if you want to contribute the page, please do so at Draft:Furious 8 until production begins. Thanks and I hope you understand. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:16, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Sure thing, I'll keep that in mind for next time. That's all good, so long as I can replace the information on the draft with the information that I added, and I was just in the process of adding some new information, so I'll be sure to add that as well. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 04:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding the situation. Cheers :). --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 14:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi again, Captain Assassin!. I have a question – now that there's been a set time and place for filming to begin (even though it's not until April) are we able to create the article now? This would save others attempting to create one or at least put in redlinks. Surely it wouldn't hurt to create the article when it's less than three months away – after all, it is more than just some "announced project". I think that we've done a good job preserving it. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 06:30, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes we've done a great work, especially you. But I'm sorry to say that we still cannot move the draft to mainspace because filming hasn't begun yet, we can just move one or two days before confirmed filming start date. And don't worry about other's attempting to create article, we'll still be able to move the draft. Just keep your eyes on the redirect and if someone tries to create, just keep redirecting it until we get a confirmed tart date. Cheers. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your suggestions. I have gone to the talk pages of several Wikipedia pages already because of your help. I am now more firmilliar with editing on Wikipedia.

Thanks – Zackmadd (talk) 22:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem. Just be sure to be more aware of everything else that goes on at Wikipedia, and not just edit at random because you think that you're doing the right thing every time. By that, I mean you should check out some of the site's policies and look particularly at how some of the more experienced editors here format their edits. That way, you'll have something to go by, should you choose to focus on a broader range of topics when editing here on Wikipedia. Hope that helps. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 11:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

It does help. I mainly edit band pages but do work on tv show pages too. I have been looking up policies. Talk pages have helped me the most. On a different note I would like to say good job on your Aspect band page. It is put together very well. Zackmadd (talk) 18:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you – it took me a while to format it the way I wanted it, but I'm glad that you like it. I've been getting that from several other editors as well, which is nice. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 12:15, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry dude i was just trying to help. I was trying to show more detail of the bands past history with demos, eps, etc. ill stop with doing the other releases and add more detail from now on. Sorry again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cameronsmiley2345qwerty (talk • contribs) 18:29, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Foo Fighters

Thanks for pointing out the need to source the Foo Fighters piece. Still learning, and glad to have constructive guidance. I reposted with a citation. Jordan Jones (talk) 12:28, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

No problem – you did well. Always happy to help. Regards, 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 12:33, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

IV"e got evidence of rise against

I got the evidence that rise against is and should be rise against is an Chicago punk rock band because they are verry poltical like anti flag and sometime green day and also what it says on your text of rise against they are straight edge including Barnes and also tim mclrath supports animal rights.Jg9443 (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Let"s compromise

So it made me think that all that i have been doing is stating my opinion all the time and bothering you i felt at this time i wanted to compromise i will not change the genre i"ll keep it the way it is but like it says on your edit page of rise against Do not change the genre with providing resources well i got one that"s helpfull so how about this? Rise Against is a Chicago punk rock band on your Wikipedia and on my simple Wikipedia i"ll change it to Rise against is an american melodic hardcore band and lets be bygones be bygones.Jg9443 (talk) 17:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

So it made me think that all i have been doing is stating my opinion thees past 3 months and witch it says on the rise against edit page do not change the genre unless you have provided sources so i will not bother you or change the genre"s but this title of the article should be helpful so hear it goes instead of rise against is a american melodic hardcore band it should be rise against is a Chicago punk rock if you do that on your Wikipedia page i"ll change to rise against is american melodic hardcore band in my simple Wikipedia page lets be bygones be bygones.Jg9443 (talk) 01:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I really got evidence

I really got evidence that they are not American punk rock or American melodic hardcore no they are a Chicago Punk rock band this is my proof At the Adelaide show, Chicago punk rockers Rise Against opened for the Foo ... 50 Rock Facts You May Not Know August 14, 2015 7:48 AM.Jg9443 (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

And also i almost forgot here"s the video to prove it https://www.punknews.org/article/53129/rise-against-historia-calamitatumJg9443 (talk) 20:50, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I was wondering enough with the fighting enough me having to brother i was wondering if we can switch like i put my wikipedia simple english page of rise against and send it to your page and you can put a sub page just in case your asking if i really don"t have evidence i do i got the source everthing and to prove that rise against is a chicago punk rock band look it Chicago-based punk act has taken in some time.

Read more at http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/rise-againsts-the-black-market-cracks-u-sJg9443 (talk) 02:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I hope I'm doing this right. You deleted an edit I made for an actor's bio because I forgot to include the link. This time I included the link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.179.143.159 (talk) 02:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I have reverted your edit again for two reasons: firstly, iMDB is not a reliable source, especially as it links directly to trivia, and secondly, it wasn't formatted properly. You can find out how to cite your sources here. Hope that helps. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 02:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Metallica/Guns N' Roses

I just saw you revert my changes in the Metallica article. I removed Guns N' Roses in the "associated acts" section because the members of Metallica were never members of Guns N' Roses. I thought "associated acts" is supposed to be "for closely interconnected bands, sharing two or more members, sharing album projects, or touring together as a single collaboration act", and none of the members of Metallica were ever members of Guns N' Roses, as a result, I reverted your changes. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 05:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because I perceived the addition of Guns N' Roses as a good one, due to the Guns N' Roses/Metallica Stadium Tour. I am very well aware that the two bands never shared any members, but the fact that it was such a huge collaboration was the reason why I didn't remove it in the first place. I'll leave it be, but if you understand it from my point of view, you'll keep that it mind for next time. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 05:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The tour makes the addition valid, full stop. I agree with 4TheWynne. EauZenCashHaveIt (I'm All Ears) 12:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Just because bands tour together does not make them associated, they are not working together, just sharing a stage/venue. Mlpearc (open channel) 15:49, 24 November 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) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Unwarranted reversion

Regarding your reversion to the edits on Dwayne Johnson...

1) Please do not do simple reverts on changes where multiple edits are made if you are meaning to only revert a single thing. You remove edits that have nothing to do with the change in question.

2) The relationship between Johnson and the Anoaʻi family is as well documented as just about anything. (As someone who claims to be a fan, it's odd that you would be unaware of this.) If you feel that this fact is disputable enough to warrant removal from Wikipedia, you will need to edit not only the Anoaʻi family article, but virtually every article for every member of that family...as they all mention Johnson as being part of that family tree. (Not to mention the "Relatives in wrestling" section on the Dwayne Johnson page itself).

I have added back the edits you reverted, as they are not at all controversial, and easily verified.

If you have an issue with their inclusion, please open a section for discussion on the appropriate talk page.

Thank you.

--Wikisian (talk) 23:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikisian, if it is "as well-documented as just about anything", surely that means that you can provide a source? 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 23:37, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
I have again added back the changes you reverted (without explanation, by the way), this time including a few citations. You may now wish to update the other pages which all mention Dwayne Johnson being part of the Anoaʻi family tree with such citations, so that there will be no similar confusion in the future. This includes but is not limited to: Anoaʻi family, Roman Reigns, Peter Maivia, Lia Maivia, Rocky Johnson, Afa Anoaʻi, Sika Anoa'i, Reno Anoa'i, Yokozuna (wrestler), Rosey (wrestler), Sam Fatu, Umaga (wrestler), Rikishi (wrestler), Samula Anoaʻi, Afa Anoaʻi, Jr., Lloyd Anoaʻi, and The Usos.
Again, these are just a few of the places which mention the Miavia/Anoaʻi connection and name Dwayne Johnson as part of the Anoaʻi family tree. There may be others. So be mindful there may be more articles in need of update to avoid this issue occurring in the future. Do not be afraid to look for more.
If you have any further issues, I advise you to open a discussion on the appropriate talk page and refrain from edit warring. I would also remind you canvassing others to do your warring for you is also not allowed on Wikipedia. --Wikisian (talk) 01:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Wikisian, see? That wasn't so hard, was it? Now before you go baselessly accusing me of edit warring or asking others to do so for me (as I have taken no action since replying earlier), I would advise you to make the edits yourself, as this family tree business seems to be your area of expertise more than it is mine; indeed, I know little-to-nothing on the subject (but that doesn't make me any less of a fan). Don't go asking me to do all of the hard work for you, as I have no interest in updating countless pages with the citations that you added yourself; if you're so passionate about it, you should be the one putting in the time. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 01:39, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

James Spader Edit

You jut deleted one of my edits because you said it was poorly referenced or unrefernced work? Could you help me by letting me know what to fix? --Joshewuh2 (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Joshewuh2, three things:
  • Grammatically, it could have been formatted better. Another thing to note is that commas and full stops go before the reference and not after.
  • On Wikipedia, we tend to go by what reliable sources tell us, and most of the sources that you used weren't reliable.
  • "Early life" sections are normally kept relatively short anyway.
Based on that, unless you can trim the information down and find some better sources to support your work, I would leave it how it is now. I know that you came here asking for help, but that's about as much as I can say. Thank you. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 23:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I am working on the sources now. Early Life sections really don't have a max limit however and I am trying to balance out the sections! Thanks again for the help!! --Joshewuh2 (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Based on what you've added in response to my feedback, I'm not sure if you've even addressed what I've said to you. Another really important point worth adhering to that applies more to your "Personal Life" edits, one that I know you've been warned about before, is that your edits, especially in regards to a living (or deceased) person, have to adhere to a neutral point of view. I know that, with some work, some of your additions could be useful, except that most of it was trivial and, thus, doesn't belong on Wikipedia. This is encyclopaedic material that we're dealing with, so you need to be careful with what gets added and what doesn't.
Additionally, you don't need to tag me on my own talk page, as I'll always know what's going on, and you don't need to add your username after your signature (four tildes), hence why I've removed it – again. Hope that helps. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 06:31, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Natalie Portman --- terminology of lead para

Joshua, in you edit summary you wrote when reverting my edit to Natalie Portman you wrote --- ""Director" and "producer" are most often used in this context anyway.

I say that's bollocks, and since it is your contention you'll have to prove it before anybody should accept it. So go ahead and prove that "director" and "producer" are most often used in the context of motion picture films. Is the fact you are an actor by vocation a source of bias? Are you sure you're not insisting you are right and my edit needs to be reverted because your ego. Listen mate, I've worked in the advertising business for 30 years, and generally speaking actors have considerable egos that frequently get in the way of getting the job done. You look like yet another egotist to me. Prove your point is true, or you'll have to accept you're not right about everything you think you are. Arbo (talk) 08:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Excuse me? James Arboghast, listen, I'm more than willing to accept that I might have gotten something wrong, no problem at all – but you don't have to give me a message on the verge of a personal attack just to get your point across. I was just going by what I had seen across other articles; I had seen the listed occupations on other articles without the word "film" before them more often than I had seen the opposite. But where does this "egotist" stuff come from? And why does it have anything to do with the fact that I'm an actor? Please, explain yourself. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 09:03, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll take back the personal remarks about you. Sorry, I was in a very bad mood. I'm happy to discuss actors and their egos with you but not at Wikipedia. Google me and you'll discover my public email address,; feel free to write to me. Nonetheless, as a Wikipedian you need to be aware that some of what you see in WP articles is really poor word-smithing and provides a bad example to go by. WP requires that we write for a general audience and not one or another particular "in crowd" eg: film buffs. "Director" could mean a company director at a mining company not connected in any way with the film business. A "producer" could be a theatrical producer working on Broadway or London's West End theater circuit. When you use those terms without reference to the industry you're writing about, you leave them open to interpretation by readers, many of who may have an alternative meaning or reference in mind. Arbo (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate the apology, and the spiel (to an extent), but I'm afraid I'm going to have to decline the offer. I do have a thorough understanding of how this is all supposed to work, only nobody else seemed to have a problem before, which is why I went with it. Thank you, though. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 02:13, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:4TheWynne/Archive_2&oldid=1192989348"