User talk:Bradonwiki

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Bradonwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains^(talk) 00:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to the Teahouse.

Hello! Bradonwiki, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:53, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Hello, I'm EdwardUK. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Woodkirk Academy, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. EdwardUK (talk) 13:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I attended Woodkirk Academy with both Stevie Ward and Robert Midgley so can vouch they did attend the school, it also states on the Woodkirk Academy website that they attended the school. I just didn't know how how add the proof or citation.

I've re-added Stevie Ward with a citation, but couldn't find Robert Midgley on the academy website. If you know of a website that shows he was at the school then the Wikipedia help pages or the "Teahouse" should be able to help with adding a citation. EdwardUK (talk) 06:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Saint at 2018 Academy Awards.png

A tag has been placed on File:Saint at 2018 Academy Awards.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{Non-free fair use}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 17:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if this file is unable to be used, could you please show me where I can find free photographic material to use on Wikipedia. — Thank you Bradonwiki (talk) 17:35, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Fonda at AFI Lifetime Achievement awards.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Fonda at AFI Lifetime Achievement awards.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{Non-free fair use}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 18:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Coronation Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Roach. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:57, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

White Rose Centre

added links pointing to Zara, Argos, New Look and Subway

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand what you are saying? Is this a problem? Can you link it to the retailers ? Bradonwiki (talk) 00:00, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Caroline Flack, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hackney and ITV.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry could you correct that for me? Bradonwiki (talk) 22:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Tingley

added links pointing to Morley and Beeston

Tom Zanetti

added a link pointing to Rothwell

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Olivia de Havilland, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. MOS:OVERLINK ‑‑Neveselbert (mobile) ^{(talk · contribs · email)} 08:31, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

….in your opinion. And in my opinion it gives people a helpful hyperlink to the pages of ‘Paris’ and ‘France’ because although they seem normal, easy, obvious link pages to us, there are people that are unsure as to where those places are, hence my addition to make them hyperlinks. Please don’t change this again, it is there to help people. Bradonwiki (talk) 00:16, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’d like to also add, that, at that point in the article no link had been repeated, and thus certainly added meaning. Bradonwiki (talk) 00:17, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Its literally a guideline (MOS:OVERLINK), doesnt matter what you prefer FMSky (talk) 18:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly… a guideline…not a rule Bradonwiki (talk) 12:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, it means the same thing... --FMSky (talk) 15:08, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Bradonwiki! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Adding Photos, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about List of people and films from Classical Hollywood cinema

Hello, Bradonwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Tol, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, List of people and films from Classical Hollywood cinema, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people and films from Classical Hollywood cinema (2nd nomination).

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Tol}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Tol (talk | contribs) @ 14:52, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tol:

Right.. I am absolutely sick and tired of having to argue with people as to why there isn’t allowed to be a list of remaining actors or even a list of major initial actors from the classic period in Hollywood. These lists exist for the ‘New Hollywood’ period but why not for this? And apologies to you as I’m unsure of your name, but to whomever claimed that the list of major actors was too broad, if you knew anything about film or the study of film as I do, as it was my majors degree at university you would know and understand that those notes were the major figures throughout the period mentioned, adjusted to include those of an ethnic background whom at the time were held back from attaining the spotlight. Please actually have a think a think about what you are doing before you choose to delete it. The previous deleted page was up for deletion as it had an unclear date as for the “Golden age of Hollywood”, hence why that phrase has been kept out of this page and discussion completely.

I truly believe it is important for future generations to know the important figures from this period in film history, wether it be for personal knowledge or academic, and I challenge others that think different to explain otherwise.

Thank you and kind regards Bradonwiki :)

Bradonwiki (talk) 00:23, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bradonwiki! Could you please provide a link to the lists for the "New Hollywood" period that you mentioned? (However, please note that similar content existing is not a valid reason to keep an article.) There was consensus among four other editors at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people and films from Classical Hollywood cinema (2nd nomination) that the article should be deleted, and an administrator found that it was eligible for speedy deletion. I don't think the issue about the unclear date played a part in this second deletion discussion. The main reason why I believed it was inappropriate was because it was a list without clear selection criteria, and because the selection criteria for such a list would be necessarily vague. Sincerely, Tol (talk | contribs) @ 01:56, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Clarissa Eden, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Please see MOS:OVERLINK. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 23:46, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Neveselbert: He/She knows about this rule, but chooses to ignore it (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bradonwiki#October_2021). If this continues, admin intervention might be needed. --FMSky (talk) 06:47, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Literally chill out. I’m new to editing and theres about 10,000 rules and guidelines to follow, I’m still learning. Get off your high horse. Bradonwiki (talk) 14:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Classical Hollywood cinema

I have repeatedly asked you explain any additions or deletions to the Major Figures section of this article on the Talk Page. If your additions or deletions are valid, you should not be afraid to discuss them on the Talk Page.BoBo (talk) 04:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where have you asked me this? No you haven’t.

Secondly, this type of list was previously deleted for being too long. It is getting close to that again. I am attempting to stop that by removing less notable names you keep adding. Bradonwiki (talk) 04:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, if you look at the View History section of the article, when I reverted your deletions, I specifically asked you to explain any additions/deletions on the Talk Page. You ignored that request several times. Second, in my humble opinion, it doesn't matter if the list is long if the list truly represents people involved the process of creating Classic Hollywood. I am happy to discuss how the list might be reformatted on the Talk Page if you want. BoBo (talk) 04:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In my personal opinion, you should stop any deletions until you can openly discuss on the Talk Page why such deletions are necessary or valid. BoBo (talk) 04:38, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, it was me that created this list in the first place so I agree, I’d rather not reform it too much, but I’m telling you, you will end up getting it deleted for being too long and then nobody has a list they want. I’m just trying to keep everyone happy.

Secondly, I hadn’t even seen your question to me nor was I notified of it, so no I wasn’t ignoring you. I aren’t rude. Bradonwiki (talk) 04:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To begin with, I would like to thank you for creating the article in the first place. Obviously, I am very interested in the Golden Age of Hollywood and its development. However, it is quite a broad topic. Many of the sections appear to me to need much more detailed information. It could be divided further into various categories. I have seen articles subdivided in the past if you are afraid of length. However, I do think this should all be discussed on the Talk Page. I started a conversation on the Talk Page to specifically to help create or add black and white criteria for inclusion on the list of Major Figures. This could include Academy award wins and nominations, the Top Ten Money Making Stars Poll, major success occurring between the dates 1910-1960, first member of a particular sex, ethnic group, race or nationality to achieve in a particular field, etc. For example, I don't think Sean Connery should be on the list just because of dates because his fame only began after 1960. However, all this needs to be discussed on the Talk Page. BoBo (talk) 04:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting until a full discussion has occurred on the Talk Page. You may have created this article, but you do not own it. All I am asking for is an open discussion. BoBo (talk) 04:59, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, I created both lists of figures, not the page itself. I believe it’s extremely important to know the figures who built and cemented one of the most popular and adored movie making eras in history.

I don’t disagree with what you’re saying re. discussing criteria but in my experience when all that starts, it always ends up in the entire article being deleted like what happened with Golden Age of Hollywood. Because people start arguing about the specific years in which constitutes as ‘Golden’ or ‘Classic’ and the end result the last 2 times has been complete deletion Bradonwiki (talk) 05:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t have jurisdiction over this article, and you say for me not to revert it back to its previous state before a discussion has taken place, but then I could say the same thing to you about changing my earlier edits, so please leave it alone until it has been discussed, like you suggested. Just don’t blame me if the entire thing is deleted again. Bradonwiki (talk) 05:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also.. if you actually look, a lot of the names you suggested are still there, Sean Connery (1930-2020) has been removed, as has Betty White (1922-2021) and Jane Fonda (1937-). Bradonwiki (talk) 05:09, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not suggest Sean Connery, Betty White or Jane Fonda. Every person I suggested is dead. Those who are living should only be on the living list in my opinion. No living people on the main list. BoBo (talk) 05:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second, I think you are blocking discussion on the people I have added by deleting them. Since they have been added, it is your job to start a discussion on the Talk Page as to why you think they should be removed. That will help develop community guidelines and criteria for discussion. Your wholesale deletion of many people is dismissive of the contributions of each. I will continue to revert if you do not individually address those you want to delete. You should not be afraid to logically address on the Talk Page why certain names need to be removed BoBo (talk) 05:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You suggested Sean Connery not be in there, so I removed him. I used White and Fonda as examples as Fonda’s acting credits are a little too late and White’s were on television albeit from the 1949-2021. I was attempting to show you I wasn’t just removing your edits.

Also just as a sidenote, both Sean Connery and Betty White are dead. Bradonwiki (talk) 05:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be clear, I did not add the name of Sean Connery. Look at the View History. I only made a personal comment here on your talk page in order to give an example of establishing criteria. I have not added any name to the list that became famous AFTER 1960. As I said, the wholesale removal of names without individually examining each person's merit limits discussion and does not open it up. It also helps to define what is Classic Hollywood. Isn't that what this article is supposed to be about? BoBo (talk) 05:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Akane Yamaguchi

Hello. Help remove links marked dead and copy edit. Thanks you. Jilpz (talk) 07:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand?? Bradonwiki (talk) 07:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete [1]. Jilpz (talk) 07:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bradonwiki, it's a vandal who spams this to random talkpages, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haiyenslna. -- Euryalus (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Duncan

Hello, Bradonwiki. I am informing you that I removed text that you added to the Arthur Duncan article because it appeared to have been paraphrased or copied from another source. Per Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and other policies, content like this should be removed. If you have any questions, feel free to ask and I will help to the best of my ability. --Super Goku V (talk) 11:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Classical Hollywood Cinema, you may be blocked from editing. Do NOT contravene WP:CONSENSUS again or you will be reported. See the talk page discussion last year in which it was agreed to remove those lists permanently. No Great Shaker (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the user who posted the information above was banned for WP:SOC so feel free to ignore it and continue helping improving the article. I removed their trolling section in the talk page as well. Thank you for trying to keep the list of important films there while I was absent — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.99.37.32 (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tina Louise in the list of living actors from Classical Hollywood cinema

Why can't we include Tina Louise in that list of actors? Before she did Gilligan's Island, she starred in multiple films from the late 1950s to the early 1960s. Her breakout role was in the 1958 film God's Little Acre where she won the Golden Globe Award for New Star of the Year – Actress. And1987 (talk) 16:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Bradonwiki (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert on Classical Hollywood cinema

Why did you restore this list? There seems to be a general consensus on talk to remove it, and it should be easy to see why - it doesn't really cite any sources (the one source doesn't even support most of the list.) --Aquillion (talk) 10:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because there isn’t a general consensus at all. A few people think it, the rest don’t. Bradonwiki (talk) 12:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]