User talk:ComicsAreJustAllRight

Wikipedia

Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia's Mortal Kombat articles, and your contributions to Wikipedia. However, some edits have been made to the article in order to bring it into harmony with the Mortal Kombat WikiProject's Style Guide, which is what should be used to dictate what is appropriate (and inappropriate) for MK articles. Please familiarize yourself with the guidelines shown there. All edits that do not follow these guidelines have been changed to match what our Style Guide recommends. Wikipedia does not require writers to follow all or any of these rules, but their efforts will be more appreciated when they do so. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 21:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Batman Who Laughs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Cunningham.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of an ADVERT in Allan Quatermain#Use in other works also removed my non-ADVERT contribution

== October 6, 2020—First, regarding Airship 27 and its five volumes of Quatermain pastiches, Airship 27 is a successful, legitimate publishing company founded by Ron Fortier (who has his own dense Wikipedia listing and is therefore notable) specializing in the revival of pulp fiction. It has published a few hundred books in recent years. Yet Editor “ComicsAreJustAllRight” insists in believing that this publisher has something to do with “advertising self-published materials”. Nothing is further from the truth. Airship 27 is continuing the Quatermain saga quite successfully.

Regarding Miller’s pastiche, it was published in 2005 by Wildside Press, which also has a long Wikipedia listing and his therefore notable. Yet, again, “ComicsAreJustAllRight” insists in believing that the novel was self-published and that its inclusion here is ADVERTISING, which is also far from the truth.

As explained many, many times for more than a decade, the book is notable because it was the FIRST PROSE FICTION WITH ALLAN QUATERMAIN AS THE PROTAGONIST TO BE PUBLISHED IN 78 YEARS since H. Rider Haggard's own Allan and the Ice-gods was published posthumously in 1927. I fail to understand why this legitimate concept is continually disrespected by “ComicsAreJustAllRight”.

For 13 years I’ve inserted references to Miller’s book, and the editor like clockwork removes the references. He says, “Add it again, and it will be removed. The message is now completely clear and fully understood by all.” Fine, I’ll keep replacing it every time he removes it. BTW I do not understand his comment “The message is now completely clear and fully understood by all.” The message is that Miller’s book is both notable and important. Again I cannot understand what is so hard to understand. ==

Thank you for notifying me of the WP:ADVERT content I'll need to revert. Much obliged. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 18:28, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

On August 1, I made a short, one sentence contribution. It complemented the first sentence of the section (which mentions both Holmes and Quatermain) because it is a novel that features both.

Unfortunately, an anonymous editor (just IP address, no username) felt it necessary to add an explanation of the plot. I'm going to put my original contribution back. Rfcstein (talk) 00:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philadelphia Experiment‎

Re: this edit, you may want to review WP:PST. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 01:28, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, looking back, I see where you've misunderstood. A "secondary source" is not simply a second source. Please review the guidelines. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 18:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing information about SBP

Hello, thank you for being involved, I would like to share with you some information that will help us to understand the confusion existing for this SBP page. Some years ago, this site was affected or Hijacked by psycholjournal fake website, if you see in predatoryjournals, under letter S: https://predatoryjournals.com/hijacked/#S, you will notice that the website is calling the fake website as SBP Journal. This is wrong information, you can see the issue opened with them in: https://github.com/stop-predatory-journals/stop-predatory-journals.github.io/issues/67

If you see the history, this information has caused a misunderstood. The suggestion is done in order to clarify this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franciscoangelmtz (talk • contribs) 17:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fate/kaleid liner Prisma Illya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kadokawa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flat spins

Hi Comics! On 23 May you edited Spin (aerodynamics) to organise the information about flat spins into its own sub-section. See your diff1, diff2, and diff3. All the information in the new sub-section is unsourced. On Wikipedia, any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to one or more reliable published sources - see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

I will discuss the matter on the Talk page and remove the unsourced statements. If you wish to discuss the matter further please do so on the Talk page. Dolphin (t) 12:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not my information, not my problem. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 02:23, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary

The films that were removed (or reverted) on List of media notable for being in development hell were unnecessary as most of the films do qualify as films made in production for 10 years or older.--2600:8801:30A2:4400:D8A7:1BD4:A8E8:6D18 (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's not why those edits were reverted. Please read the edit summaries. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 13:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ultron. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Calidum 19:13, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This was not an edit war, as the thorough edit summaries as well as edit timestamp records make clear, but a case of conflicting edits. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 19:15, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of media notable for being in development hell

Not sure why you ignored the message on the talk page of this article and continuously reverting everything on this page since April of this year. Can you explain your edits? Timur9008 (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just seeing to the latest incarnation of the anon-IP/multiple sockpuppets user who has made the article useless through bloated personal essays instead of worthwhile summaries. He was doing this to the "Development hell" article before the list was split. I'm glad y'all are on it; please range-ban his IP addresses again. Thanks. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 17:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any update on this? I'm glad you've identified the recurring problem. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 07:47, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miss X

Just an FYI regarding your edit to Miss X (decedent), the image in question was uploaded by the author per request several years ago, which has since been approved for use via OTRS at the Commons. The rendering was also approved for distribution by the investigating agency, as they included an early version of the rendering on NamUs. Although the artist was self-taught at the time, he has recieved training on forensic artwork in recent years, and he has since updated the reconstruction of the decedent in a contemporary fashion. --GouramiWatcher^Talk 05:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the update and clarification. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 07:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Too long"

If a section is "too long", trim it. Completely removing information is only harmful to the article. --85.167.72.91 (talk) 16:17, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to explain what any of that means. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 17:14, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've done this on multiple articles then? I'm talking about List of media notable for being in development hell. --85.167.72.91 (talk) 10:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, never mind then. My edits there were indeed trimming. For future reference, please keep summaries short and to the point, so editors like me don't have to keep going back and re-working them into encyclopedic content. Thanks! ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 07:44, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I've informed moderation that you're back misusing that article for personal essays as before. Just a heads-up in case you want to address it with them. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 07:45, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What personal essays? I've added exactly two things: Half-Life 2 Episode 3 and The Winds of Winter, both of which are notable in the subject. --85.167.72.91 (talk) 09:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're claiming I had a sockpuppet account named King Crimson the Third. Sorry, but you're wrong. --85.167.72.91 (talk) 09:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

;) Sure thing, buddy. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 04:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Believe what you want, I suppose. --85.167.72.91 (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The important thing is that you keep summaries on that page to a few sentences each. Your disruptive editing should stop and you'll trim the bloated entries that exist. We're agreed on that? ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 22:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Saint Mercurius, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berber.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Rodw, thanks for catching this one.) ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 04:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

TrangaBellam (talk) 06:28, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding your conduct

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Neutrality^talk 14:15, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 20:24, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For the details, and for my own block rationale, see the ANI discussion here. Bishonen | tålk 20:25, 10 September 2021 (UTC).[reply]

December 2021

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

-- ferret (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]