User talk:David Englander

Welcome!

Hello, David Englander, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Man on a Ledge

Your recent editing history at Man on a Ledge 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. Rosalina2427 ^{(talk to me)} 17:42, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Englander, first, if you've made no more than a dozen edits here you should't be telling others what Wikipedia is and what its rules are. Second, your content is not verified by secondary sources. If secondary sources don't discuss this stuff, we have no reason to believe it's noteworthy in the first place. And the "special features" you're pointing out really are trivial, and they're poorly written--you're really telling us that there's interviews with cast members about the film? We have guidelines for this, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film#Home_media, "The section may contain a summary of the extras included with the release, though excessive detail is to be avoided"--Now, that it has audio description, that may be worth noting since not all DVDs have that--but the rest needs to be seriously pruned. Drmies (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Englander, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi David Englander! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:38, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Man on a Ledge. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:05, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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 ~~~~}}. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:34, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

David Englander (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand that you believe I have been vandalising this page, but you must trust me when I tell you that Rayman DID PLAY Nick Cassidy in Man on a Ledge. I call this a fine art, as I own the steelbook and you do not. It clearly says "Rayman" under Nick Cassidy on the back of the steelbook release. Trust me. Pretty please. David Englander (talk) 13:24, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

CU-confirmed sock, tpa revoked. Yunshui ^雲 _水 13:56, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.