User talk:Filmgoer/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Your GA nomination of Jeepers Creepers (film series)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jeepers Creepers (film series) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 18:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jeepers Creepers (film series)

The article Jeepers Creepers (film series) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jeepers Creepers (film series) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 13:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jeepers Creepers (film series)

The article Jeepers Creepers (film series) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jeepers Creepers (film series) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 18:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek)

The article Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 18:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Congrats on the article's promotion! I've noted your accomplishment here and hope you continue working on other episodes from the series. Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek)

The article Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bagman (Better Call Saul)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bagman (Better Call Saul) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bilorv -- Bilorv (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alice in Borderland (TV series)

The article Alice in Borderland (TV series) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alice in Borderland (TV series) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bagman (Better Call Saul)

The article Bagman (Better Call Saul) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bagman (Better Call Saul) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bilorv -- Bilorv (talk) 11:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pilot (Breaking Bad)

The article Pilot (Breaking Bad) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Pilot (Breaking Bad) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 13:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pilot (Breaking Bad)

The article Pilot (Breaking Bad) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pilot (Breaking Bad) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

ON TV/KVDO-TV

Thanks for the reviews! I made most of the changes (with the exception of one each per page, see the reviews), and I'm working on archiving the references for each of the nominated pages. I'm not an Oxford comma person, so I don't typically include it, but I made the changes at your request. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:39, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

The references have now been archived on both pages. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:00, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Better Call Saul - Alpine Shepherd Boy.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Better Call Saul - Alpine Shepherd Boy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Better Call Saul - Bingo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Better Call Saul - Bingo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Better Call Saul - Hero.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Better Call Saul - Hero.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Better Call Saul - Nacho.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Better Call Saul - Nacho.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Better Call Saul - RICO.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Better Call Saul - RICO.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Better Call Saul - Switch.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Better Call Saul - Switch.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Hunger Games (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Hunger Games (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 19:21, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Response

I appreciate the heads up. I've already noticed this a while ago. Actually because of links you've made on unfilled refs to Deadline Hollywood. I haven't made that mistake in a while and have been linking appropriately. You'll notice this if you end up seeing my more recent edits. Within at least the last month. As far as the mistakes on old edits I'm not sure everywhere they are but you've probably got at least most of them. Thanks for that. If I notice any I'll fix them as well. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 18:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Hunger Games (film)

The article The Hunger Games (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Hunger Games (film) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Hunger Games (film)

The article The Hunger Games (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Hunger Games (film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 21:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

WandaVision

Thank you for the edits you recently made. I want to echo Adamstom's comment that there is some more large-scale work to be done on the article, namely adding some additional reference I myself am sitting on, and have added to the "potential refs" box on the talk page, as well as reducing the number of quotes overall in the article. Finally, since the series will probably get some major award nominations, any nomination should most likely hold off until those begin. Please remember too WP:NORUSH. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Arlo the Alligator Boy.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Arlo the Alligator Boy.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bobamnertiopsis -- Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 19:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous

The article Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bobamnertiopsis -- Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous

The article Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bobamnertiopsis -- Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Mama Who Came to Dinner

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Mama Who Came to Dinner you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Soaper1234 -- Soaper1234 (talk) 14:01, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taxi Driver

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Taxi Driver you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Andrzejbanas -- Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:00, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Mama Who Came to Dinner

The article The Mama Who Came to Dinner you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Mama Who Came to Dinner for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Soaper1234 -- Soaper1234 (talk) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The First Day of the Rest of Your Life (The Walking Dead)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The First Day of the Rest of Your Life (The Walking Dead) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Soaper1234 -- Soaper1234 (talk) 14:41, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Congrats on the GA! I've noted your accomplishment here. Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The First Day of the Rest of Your Life (The Walking Dead)

The article The First Day of the Rest of Your Life (The Walking Dead) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The First Day of the Rest of Your Life (The Walking Dead) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Soaper1234 -- Soaper1234 (talk) 21:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carry On (Supernatural)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Carry On (Supernatural) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Soaper1234 -- Soaper1234 (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carry On (Supernatural)

The article Carry On (Supernatural) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Carry On (Supernatural) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Soaper1234 -- Soaper1234 (talk) 16:02, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 20:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film)

The article The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 00:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film)

The article The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 19:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Godzilla Singular Point

May I know why have you removed my notes and references about the titles, staffs and air dates in the episode table for this show? 2A04:CEC0:1045:8445:2078:999A:6E5E:D37A (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

@2A04:CEC0:1045:8445:2078:999A:6E5E:D37A: A note stating that the information was taken from the credits isn't necessary per MOS:TVEPISODE, which says that a reliable secondary source is needed instead. Citing Netflix is also not ideal for that same reason as it's a primary source, and a subscription-only source at that, so I have removed both citations to the platform. Are these valid reasons? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

MOS:TVEPISODE says: "Episode title, writers, directors, episode numbers, airdates, production codes, and viewership numbers must be reliably sourced, either from the opening/closing credits or from secondary sources..." The official website of the series hasn't updated their story section with the episode titles and staffs because the anime will air later, but even then it's not sure that they will list them, meaning that there won't be any reliable seconday sources available for that matter, hence why I put that note for now which is highly used on other pages. Same for Netflix, as of right now, it's the only reliable source listing both the original japanese titles and the localized english ones. A subscription isn't necessary to see the episode titles on Netflix or else I would have mentioned it in the template which contain a parameter for that case. I don't see how your contribution help improving the page, if you could at least propose another reliable source, now the table is let with non cited informations. 2A04:CEC0:1000:B59D:4940:B813:B748:28D9 (talk) 01:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lost (season 6)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lost (season 6) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of RunningTiger123 -- RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lost (season 6)

The article Lost (season 6) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Lost (season 6) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of RunningTiger123 -- RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

RunningTiger123 has given you a puppy!

Hey, I wanted to give you this after my review at Talk:Lost (season 6)/GA1. I know it must be disappointed to have a failed GA review, and I wanted to let you know that it's in no way a knock against your body of work. I've seen many of your other articles, and your work is of the highest quality; I just don't see that in the article right now, but I'm sure it can get there if you put some time into it. Let me know if you need any help clarifying what I said in the review or looking for places that need improvement; I'd be more than happy to help with that. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:05, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{subst:Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Your GA nomination of If Anything Happens I Love You

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article If Anything Happens I Love You you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gerald Waldo Luis -- Gerald Waldo Luis (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bilorv -- Bilorv (talk) 03:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for A Goofy Movie

On 28 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Goofy Movie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that three-quarters of the animated film A Goofy Movie had to be reshot due to a single dead pixel on a faulty monitor, leading to a delayed release? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Goofy Movie. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A Goofy Movie), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous)

The article Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Brave (Jurassic World Camp Cretaceous) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bilorv -- Bilorv (talk) 15:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

C.D. Luis Ángel Firpo

Hello, could you give a wikification to the article, it is very badly edited.OaxacaGenius (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Jojo Rabbit GAN (ping when reply)

Hi, saw you adding the GAN banner to Jojo Rabbit. I was actually planning to make it a GAN, and I majorly contributed to it, so there's no way I can review, so I wonder if I can be credited as co-nominator. I also think the Reception section needs some more work. GeraldWL 10:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: I have added you as a co-nominator on the GAN-page. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 10:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Some Dude From North Carolina, thanks! GeraldWL 10:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of If Anything Happens I Love You

The article If Anything Happens I Love You you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:If Anything Happens I Love You for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gerald Waldo Luis -- Gerald Waldo Luis (talk) 11:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Taxi Driver

Hey hey. It's been about a week. I know you have many wiki projects on the go, but do you think you'll be able to tackle the rest of the GA requests in the article? I've responded to some others as well. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: I think so. I'll try addressing most, if not all of your comments by the end of today, but I might have to do some tomorrow due to some projects I'm working on at home. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

No pressure. If you need more time no worries. Just figured i'd check in. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Ga review

Hey bro. I’ve seen you started doing Ga reviews now. If you could( could you review “The Woo”? I’m wanting to make that and all the songs from Pop Smoke ga before I graduate high school. I’ll be down to review on of the article you nominated for Ga if you want? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 00:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Jojo Rabbit "terribly written"

Hey there. At the talk page someone apparently wrote that the article is terribly written. I mean, as an ESL I expect to have made some grammar waves, but do you think it is poorly written? GeraldWL 06:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I think it's great! Don't know what that person was on about, but it's not "terribly written". Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 11:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:QUOTE

I have a question about quoting for my Leanna article – am I putting the cite right after the quotation mark or at the end of the sentence? As a random example: would it be:

She said that her character is "feisty and nasty"[1] in scenes.

or

She said that her character is "feisty and nasty" in scenes.[1] – DarkGlow • 20:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@DarkGlow: At the end of the sentence. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I just wanted to drop a thank you for reviewing the article so quickly – and a thank you for every other GA of mine so far! It really means a lot. I'd love to begin reviewing GA nominees eventually once I become fully clued up on the criteria, especially as I know you have some in the backlog that you deserve to have reviewed! – DarkGlow • 21:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:ELORDER" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:ELORDER. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 2#Wikipedia:ELORDER until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Guy Macon (talk) 01:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek)

On 3 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the series finale of Schitt's Creek was written in three hours by co-creator Daniel Levy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Happy Ending (Schitt's Creek)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

San Marino in the Eurovision Song Contest

I thought it would be appropriate to notify you of this topic being nominated, as you were the reviewer of one of the articles so I am surprised you haven't left any comments on the nom yet... hope to hear your verdict soon! --K. Peake 12:12, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive tagging of articles

Please stop adding {{Use American English}} and {{Use mdy dates}} banners to articles where those issues have not been present. I'm not sure what kind of WP:POINT you're trying to make but it is clearly a disruptive nuisance. We can do without the pointless clutter. Continuing this behavior may lead to you being blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Toddst1: Don't see how adding {{Use American English}} to American articles and {{Use mdy dates}} to articles using mdy dates is "disruptive nuisance" but I'll stop if you want, I guess. But either way, could you lead me to a link saying adding those tags is disruptive? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 11:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tag bombing sums it up. If you need more, you should read Wikipedia:Responsible tagging.Toddst1 (talk) 13:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Toddst1: I mean, WP:TAGBOMB centers on adding numerous tags to articles when one is enough (not mentioning anything about "Use ___" templates) and WP:RESPTAG says the same thing (ex. using "more citations needed" instead of multiple "citation needed" tags). Again, no mention of what I was doing. Since they're both essays, a discussion might be needed to address the issue, but either way, I'll keep this in mind. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Toddst1: I also reverted one of these. Some Dude From North Carolina, why are you adding these tags to articles that don't have any problems? Do you find a lot of editors adding British or Canadian English to articles about North Carolina? Magnolia677 (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: One of the purposes to the "Use American English" tag are for future reference for new users, who might not know why type of English to use. The addition of the "Use mdy dates" tag is for consistency with the article, to fix sources, and again, for future reference so disruptive good faith edits don't occur. I don't see a problem with adding the tags to American articles using mdy dates, and there's no clear rule (not an essay) stating that they can't be added. If you guys find it disruptive, make a discussion, or send me to a rule that says I'm in the wrong. I don't see how you guys are helping by reverting edits that do more good, than whatever you guys find to be bad. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:21, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Since you're WP:NOTGETTINGIT, perhaps you'd rather join the discussion here. Toddst1 (talk) 20:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Everything Is Fine (The Good Place)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Everything Is Fine (The Good Place) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 16:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Everything Is Fine (The Good Place)

The article Everything Is Fine (The Good Place) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Everything Is Fine (The Good Place) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 17:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Everything Is Fine (The Good Place)

The article Everything Is Fine (The Good Place) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Everything Is Fine (The Good Place) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Lincoln Lawyer (TV series) (April 7)

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:  The comment the reviewer left 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 Draft:The Lincoln Lawyer (TV series) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:The Lincoln Lawyer (TV series), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

M. Night Shyamalam filmography

Congratulations Some Dude from North Carolina, thanks to your important contributions to M. Night Shyamalan filmography has been promoted to the featured list. Thank you very much for taking the time and dedication to improve the list. Bruno Rene Vargas (talk) 22:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Walter White (Breaking Bad)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Walter White (Breaking Bad) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DMT biscuit -- DMT biscuit (talk) 20:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Lighthouse (2019 film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Lighthouse (2019 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HumanxAnthro -- HumanxAnthro (talk) 02:41, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Walter White (Breaking Bad)

The article Walter White (Breaking Bad) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Walter White (Breaking Bad) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DMT biscuit -- DMT biscuit (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Some_Dude_From_North_Carolina reported by User:Praxidicae (Result: ). Thank you. TAXIDICAE💰 18:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Godfather

Regarding this matter, on reflection, I consider myself to have behaved badly. Please accept my apology.
I shall put it down to being a grumpy old man who will be 79 in under two weeks.
Regards,
Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 19:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

FAR for article you are a significant contributor to

I have nominated Doctor Who missing episodes for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 01:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Nvm, after further investigation your circa 10% of the authorship of this article is a single IA bot run, so feel free to ignore this if desired. Hog Farm _Talk 01:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film)

On 18 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Wolf of Wall Street set a Guinness world record for the most instances of swearing in a film, with the word "fuck" said a total of 569 times? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Who on earth do you think you are?!

Some dude from North Carolina?! :D Sorry, but your name made me chuckle when I saw it. Hope all is well in NC. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Good article

Please stop moving the placement of the good article tag. It makes no difference to the way the page is rendered, so it is an unnecessary edit in that respect, however, the good article indicator appears at the top of the page, so on the premise that things should appear in the code in some relatiomship to where they render on the page, it shoudl go at the time. I'm reverting your edits. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: The moves are based on MOS:ORDER, a major guideline on Wikipedia. If you revert the edits, you WILL be reported and possibly blocked. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I won;t, because MOs is a guideline and not a policy. It is not mandatory. Also, Wikipedia's guidelines are descriptive and not prescriptive. If you come across a very large number of articles in which the "good article" tag is at the top and not at the bottom, that means that a large number of Wikipedia editors are putting it there. In that circumstance, it is more appropriate to change the guideline so that it reflects actual practice, then it is to change a very large number of articles in a way which does not affect the rendering of the page, and which clogs up people's watchlists. I beieve that you have already been advised on ANI that doing this -- making unnecessary changes -- is not a good idea.

You seem to have settled on a method of editing which involves taking a single guideline of some sort and then making mass changes to reflect it. Again, this is a bad idea, since actual practice is more important than a written guideline, and mass changes should always be discussed before they are made, and a consensus reached that making the changes is appropriate. As far as I can tell, you have not done this. I suggest that you find a different modus operandi for editing here, or it is likely that it is you who will find themselves blocked. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: If you didn't know, a literal bot adds the tag to the top of the article because it doesn't know where exactly to correctly put it in the article (above categories / below nav boxes). Reverting those edits isn't helpful either, and I won't discuss this issue with you here, as you have been reported at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Beyond My Ken disruptively editing. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

If the bot is doing it, then it has approval from the Bot Approval Group to do so. That's consensus for the placement at the top right there, so please stop. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:25, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: There has been consensus, at various discussions (here and here) and the literal document of the icon, where it says, "This template should be placed at the bottom of the article before the defaultsort and categories." Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Again, guidelines frequently lag behind practice. If you thought that the bot was making a mistake, why didn't you contact the bot operator and discuss it with them, instead of making mass changes without a consensus to do so. (The discussions you cite are not a consensus for making mass changes, they're discussions about the guideline, a different thing.) Finally, how does an editor with 10 months experience in this account know all this? Did you have a previous account? Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

STOP COMMENTING HERE - the discussion is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Beyond My Ken disruptively editing so add your comments there (also stop copy-and-pasting the same comments in both areas). Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• Please stop attempting to post on my talk page. If youhave anything to say to me, use the totally unwarranted AN/I report you started. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You asked me a question on YOUR talk page and I responded. Like I said, you reverted a whopping 68 edits following Wikipedia's guidelines. Your edits were reported as a result. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Rebel (2021 TV series), did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Per WP:CITEVAR, "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference." Per MOS:ALLCAPS, title are not supposed to be all capitalized FYI. In addition, "Updated" is part of the title when it is updated few hours later with low ratings of TV series. — YoungForever^(talk) 20:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: really, a "did not appear constructive [...] familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines" notice? I've been here about a year, I have read the policies and guidelines, so sorry about those minor issues in my edits, I guess. Also, what's with the link to WP:CITEVAR as an "attempt to change an article's established citation style"? All I added were archived references with a partially capitalized title (not MOS:ALLCAPS for the record). Was it about using "|website=" instead of "|work=", cause those appear to be interchangeable. Anyway, I saw your other edits and I fixed some of them. I got your reasoning and there's no need to always try giving editors (especially those that have been here for about a year) notices on simply reverting an edit. We have a watchlist, you know. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

You were absolutely changing the style when it was clearly already established. You were moving everything around to your preferred style on the Showbuzz Daily references. — YoungForever^(talk) 21:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: You mean while citing the source? That doesn't even change the format, it's just the template I use. Also, do you really need to revert a bunch of edits only to add most of the content back with the next one? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Note - new comments about editing at Home Economics (TV series) unrelated to citations added by the same user

You are using MOS:DATECOMMA incorrectly. — YoungForever^(talk) 16:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: Elaborate. WP:DATECOMMA says "Dates in month–day–year format require a comma after the day, as well as after the year, unless followed by other punctuation", this being a date written at the end of the sentence. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Did you even look at the example? There are two elements in between. Whereas, on the Home Economics, there are only one element. — YoungForever^(talk) 16:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: Are you referring to the example in WP:DATECOMMA? The policy applies for all uses of mdy dates, as it's grammatically correct, so it doesn't matter about what's before or after the day; your edits have become disruptive. My point is supported by the Modern Language Association, Wikipedia's guidelines, and other reliable sources on grammar. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't apply to date ranges and in between dates. Wikipedia do not follow Modern Language Association. Please see this example. — YoungForever^(talk) 16:47, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Your cited "example" doesn't explain why the edit was reverted. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It was reverted, because the comma doesn't belong there. It was reverted several times by several different veteran editors. — YoungForever^(talk) 16:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Weird how they never explained their reverts or started a discussion on the comma thing, so it would be better to get a consensus or rule. Either way, the commas are still grammatically correct. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Further reliable sources: "When the date appears in the middle of a sentence, commas should appear both before and after the year." (from The Punctuation Guide) and "Note the use of the comma after the date when it appears in the middle of a sentence." (from Grammarly). Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It was broadcast from August 20, 1989 to May 22, 1993 is correct because it is equivalent to August 20, 1989–May 22, 1993. — YoungForever^(talk) 17:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: Do you have a source, guideline, or actual discussion on Wikipedia to back your claim. Your statement would still be grammatically incorrect so I think you're WP:NOTGETTINGIT. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 17:59, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

The only person is WP:NOTGETTINGIT is you. MOS:DATERANGE do not showed them with commas. En dash and "to" are the same thing FYI. — YoungForever^(talk) 20:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Reference: How are commas used in date ranges?. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia do not follow Modern Language Association. None of the examples on MOS:DATERANGE nor MOS:DATECOMMA even showed commas that way at all. — YoungForever^(talk) 02:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

...and MOS:DATERANGE also doesn't show how they would be used normally. WP:DATECOMMA clearly says "Dates in month–day–year format require a comma after the day, as well as after the year" as that's how they are formatted, no matter the case unless you use other punctuation. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at The Godfather shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. TAXIDICAE💰 18:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Gopala Gopala (2015 film), did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. SP013 (talk) 19:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@SP013: Are you saying my edit following Wikipedia's guidelines (MOS:ORDER) did not follow Wikipedia's guidelines? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Some Dude From North Carolina, Reading the previous threads it seems that you have violated the policies and guidelines multiple times prior and you were also involved in an edit war due to this. SP013 (talk) 19:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@SP013: ... and those discussion were discussed and closed. So, why did you send me a message about an editor reverting an edit where I was indeed following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Some Dude From North Carolina, I saw that you made multiple changes to articles similar to this and so I decided to send you a friendly reminder that's all no need to talk to me in a threatening tone just because you and Beyond My Ken have a war going on and you seem to be angry at him :). SP013 (talk) 20:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@SP013: Sorry about that, I was just confused a bit. Well, I guess thanks for the reminder. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jeepers Creepers (2001 film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jeepers Creepers (2001 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lirim.Z -- Lirim.Z (talk) 10:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jeepers Creepers (2001 film)

The article Jeepers Creepers (2001 film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jeepers Creepers (2001 film) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lirim.Z -- Lirim.Z (talk) 13:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jeepers Creepers (2001 film)

The article Jeepers Creepers (2001 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jeepers Creepers (2001 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lirim.Z -- Lirim.Z (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

March 2021 GAN Backlog drive

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		Thank you for completing 62 reviews in the March 2021 backlog drive. Your work helped us reduce the backlog by over 52%. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I Care a Lot

Per Template:Infobox film, I added actor names to I Care a Lot as they are listed in the billing block, which is the list that adorns the bottom portion of the official poster. In this case, that poster says "[...] a J BLAKESON film ROSAMUND PIKE 'I CARE A LOT' PETER DINKLAGE EIZA GONZALEZ CHRIS MESSINA with ISIAH WHITLOCK JR. and DIANNE WIEST [...]". The actors listed before "with" are co-starring. This is similar to e.g. the Passengers article, where Andy García is listed as starring, even though he's only in the film for ten seconds or so. --143.176.30.65 (talk) 14:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@143.176.30.65: Are you looking at the same poster? Rosamund Pike is the only actress listed in it. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

No, you need the poster with the billing block at the bottom. I'll look one up and I'll give you the link. --143.176.30.65 (talk) 14:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Here's an example. I'll try to find the US version. --143.176.30.65 (talk) 14:20, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

No need, I have reverted my edit. Thank you for telling me. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Drafts

Hello Some Dude from North Carolina, I would appreciate if instead of practically creating blank drafts at least you add a reference before doing it because now you are doing what you reproached me a while ago. Right now, you're the only one initiating drafts so lazily because neither I, nor @Rusted AutoParts:, nor @Apd9696: do it that way. Bruno Vargas _{Eñe'ẽ avec moi} 18:15, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bruno Rene Vargas: I added content less than 30 seconds after creating the page. Don't see an issue as I improved the article seconds after without simply leaving it blank for several minutes. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

For me if it is a problem because I following your recommendations and those of other users now every time I create my drafts I do it with at least one reference and in the time it takes you to do that, you arrive and simply put an empty template with the excuse that you keep expanding it after a few minutes. The fact that you expand them in a few minutes does not take away the fact that you have created them lazily. Do not take it the wrong way, it is only a recommendation so that we can all get along better. Bruno Vargas _{Eñe'ẽ avec moi} 18:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't mean to intrude but I really don't think this is too much of a problem. Creating drafts isn't something that can be done instantaneously; writing articles takes time, so whether the article starts off as a practically blank page isn't exactly a bad thing as long as it's not just left blank for a lengthy amount of time. It took me exactly an hour to fully flesh out Draft:Haunted Mansion (upcoming film), and I only started off with a half-done infobox, empty sections, and a messy lead. All that really matters is how the drafts end up when authors have finished editing them. We all end up with articles that are written in sufficient detail, so whatever they start off as doesn't matter. I think the reason behind all this is due to edit conflicts, so I feel like it might be a good idea to leave each to their own to avoid edit conflicts as they can be infuriating. I've tried to make lots of articles in the past just to find that someone else has already created the draft. When that happens, I just take a look at the draft to see if I can improve it and move on. There isn't a competition about who has made the most articles. APD (hmu) 19:34, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Question

I noticed this post and in looking at the link in the edit summary I ventured to this page. I was looking for a script, or a tools web-page, but couldn't find one. Is this something you did manually? Or is there a script or page I can use to help automate that? Any info would be appreciated. — Ched (talk) 23:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC) Cute little puppy too. — Ched (talk) 23:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ched: You can find the tool here. It takes about a minute to load but it archives sources automatically under your account. Hope that's what you're looking for. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:24, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I think it will come in pretty handy. :-) — Ched (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Everything Is Fine (The Good Place)

On 26 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Everything Is Fine (The Good Place), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when D'Arcy Carden was cast in the series premiere of The Good Place as Janet, a guide, news outlets were purposely lied to that her character was "a violin salesperson with a checkered past"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Everything Is Fine (The Good Place). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Everything Is Fine (The Good Place)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Taxi Driver

The article Taxi Driver you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Taxi Driver for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Andrzejbanas -- Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Super Bowl Commercials Good Article Review

Hello, Some Dude From North Carolina! I believe I have addressed all of your comments on the Super Bowl Commercials article, besides archiving the references and a few areas I have questions in. Would you be able to review it again to see if there is any other edits that should be done? Thank you so much! I really appreciate all of your work reviewing this article! JParksT2023 (talk) 15:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Jeepers Creepers (2001 film)

On 8 May 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jeepers Creepers (2001 film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the production of Jeepers Creepers, a budget cut of $1 million resulted in a third of the film being rewritten? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jeepers Creepers (2001 film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jeepers Creepers (2001 film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Revert in Jeepers Creepers

Hi, could you explain why you reverted? No reasons were given. Are you assuming those cities would be recognized by average ENGLISH readers? Wikipedia (English version) is used by readers world-wide, and those cities are not well-known world-wide like London or New York City. The rules for undiscussed revert apply for obvious vandalism, which this is not. Also, revert reason should be provided in edit summary. Thank you. Mistakefinder (talk) 15:09, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Mistakefinder: I do not see a reason to specify that those cities are from the United States. The mention of Florida, however, can be added back. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 15:10, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

As I mentioned, Wikipedia serves readers from all over the world, not just from the US. It cannot be assumed that all English readers know what or where Florida is. Consider readers from South Africa or Nigeria, both Englsiht speaking countries. In Wikipedia as well as any global reference websites, there's a need to avoid specific country-centric perspective in descriptive references. I believe there's probably a Wikipedia policy on that. If you think putting United States behind the city names seem awkward, a possible solution is to add "American" before "horror" in the opening sentence. However, a movie being American-made doesn't preclude it from being shot on location outside of the US, which is often the case. Another solution is to put "Florida, United States" after the city names, which is I think the best. However, I think the key point is I would appreciate it if other editors don't just revert an editors changes without discussion, as per Wikipedia policy, because among other things, it's actually basically rude... Please consider how you'd feel if your edits just get reverted by somet else, especially when no reasons are given... Mistakefinder (talk) 18:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)