User talk:LegerPrime

LegerPrime, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi LegerPrime! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellar

At Interstellar (film), you added information that was not shown here. It does not mention anything about a Justice League film or the sequels to Pacific Rim and Godzilla. Where did you see the information? If it is a reliable source, we can cite it to back the new information. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 02:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Pacific Rim (film), without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Areaseven (talk) 05:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Pacific Rim (film), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You have been posting the same speculative opinion about the fate of Legendary's split with WB over and over again without a legitimate reference. Stop it now, or you will be blocked from editing. Areaseven (talk) 07:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently adding unsourced information to articles. Please include references to reliable sources when adding information. If you are not sure how to add such sources, please see WP:CITE or ask for assistance at the Helpdesk or the Teahouse. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits to "Legendary Pictures"

Hello LegerPrime! You have recently been adding Dracula Untold and Jurassic World to the list of films in production on the Legendary Pictures article. However, there are no reliable sources that have confirmed that Legendary Pictures is producing the films. Additionally, Jurassic World is not yet in production, as it is still in the development stage. Please only add a film to the list if a source can be found. Regards, – Zntrip 23:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Legendary Pictures shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Areaseven (talk) 03:38, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for persistently adding unsourced information to articles. Please include references to reliable sources when adding information. If you are not sure how to add such sources, please see WP:CITE or ask for assistance at the Helpdesk or the Teahouse. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:44, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Legendary Pictures

Hello LegerPrime! I have removed the "In development" sub-section from Legendary Pictures because of the difficulty of maintaining a list of films for that category. There are several other films that are in development at Legendary Pictures other than Jurassic World, but there are insufficient reliable sources to maintain a comprehensive and accurate list of in-development films. I understand that you are eager to add the film to the article, but I think it is best to wait until production starts within the next few months. If you would like to discuss the mater further, feel free to start a section on the article's talk page. Regards, – Zntrip 03:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding Dracula Untold. No source has confirmed that Legendary is producing. – Zntrip 16:12, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Untitled Fantastic Four reboot, you may be blocked from editing. Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained removal of content

Hello LegerPrime. Please explain why you are removing cited content from "Legendary Pictures". Per Wikipedia:Content removal, "unexplained content removal when the reason for the removal is not obvious is open to being promptly reverted". If there is a reason as to why the content should not be included in the article, I'm happy to discuss it with you, but in the future please utilize the edit summary to explain why you are making changes to an article. – Zntrip 23:23, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at the source? Fast & Furious 7 and Everest are both mentioned. – Zntrip 03:12, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on King Kong (2005 film). 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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; 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.
Thank you. -- DonIago (talk) 19:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on King Kong (2005 film). 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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; 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.
Thank you. -- DonIago (talk) 15:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deceptive content

An editor with your history of problematic edits should be sure to only bring quality, indisputable content to Wikipedia. In these edits you state matter-of-factly, "In December 2014, it was confirmed that Sony Pictures had made a deal with Nintendo to create an animated remake film based on the Mario franchise." However, the source you added, has backed off the claim, which you should do also. "UPDATE: Arad has denied that the deal has closed." and "After publication, Arad denied to BuzzFeed News via email that the Super Mario deal had closed, saying his negotiations with Nintendo were 'just the beginning.'" If you're only here to spread rumors and perpetuate unsubstantiated information, please let me know and I'll be happy to revoke your editing privileges. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

Hello, I'm 4TheWynne. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Warcraft (film), 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 4TheWynne^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:19, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello, I'm Amccann421. Your recent edit to the page Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Amccann421 (talk) 20:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Major film studio: DWA

Please actual read the source before prematurely adding NBCUniversal (Comcast) as owning DreamWorks Animation. Per your Deadline source: "'...we look forward to closing the transaction in the coming months,' Universal spokeswoman Teri Everett says." and "This is (sic) deal still needs to be approved in some territories." Spshu (talk) 13:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 10 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Warcraft (film) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help) and a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made a change to an article, The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything: A VeggieTales Movie, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 9 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the DreamWorks page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to XXX: Return of Xander Cage, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 7 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the XXX: Return of Xander Cage page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at XXX: Return of Xander Cage, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop removing reliably sourced content. It doesn't matter whether someone's logo appears in a film; what matters is what the sources say. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, LegerPrime. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Death Note (2017 film). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. TheDeviantPro (talk) 00:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Hellboy II: The Golden Army, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 01:15, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. You've been here since 2014, so I'm not sure why you're not adhering to WP:VERIFY. I would also note that you've begun edit-warring to restore uncited and non-notable claims. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Paranormal Activity. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:49, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Insidious (film). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Splice (film). Stop adding unsourced production companies. This edit includes a citation, but it's broken and is not defined anywhere in the article. You've been warned several times about adding poorly-sourced content, and you need to stop doing this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:07, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well that explains why you took out Dark Castle Entertainment, but why did you remove Warner Bros. Pictures? --LegerPrime (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Legendary Entertainment

Per the section heading: "For the purposes of this list, films that are 'in production' are films whose principal photography is ongoing or finished. Films in development and pre-production are not included in this list." The film you added is not yet "in production" and therefore should not be included. – Zntrip 04:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't change anything. I added a link to said movie. --LegerPrime (talk) 04:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Funimation, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ChamithN (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, LegerPrime. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can we nominate ourselves? --LegerPrime (talk) 22:19, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Marvel Studios, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 01:33, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Marvel Studios. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. General Ization ^Talk 01:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced speculation is not permitted anywhere in Wikipedia. General Ization ^Talk 01:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at IQiyi. General Ization ^Talk 12:24, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Proposed acquisition of 21st Century Fox by Disney. AdamDeanHall (talk) 20:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did Proposed acquisition of 21st Century Fox by Disney. AdamDeanHall (talk) 20:39, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistent vandalism. 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 ~~~~}}. Alexf^(talk) 20:55, 13 January 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).

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

Request reason:

I only changed the word "own" to "inherit". Disney would inherit their ownership. I just thought "inherit" was the proper word for this scenario. Also, if/when Marvel Studios makes another Hulk film, it would obviously be after the untitled forth Avengers film, and there is potential for one. If you guys want to stop, I'll do so. I've finished reading the block policy and I swear before I go and do something like this again, I'll run it by you guys first.

Decline reason:

Yes, we want you to stop. Stop adding unsourced material. Didn't you know that? There are several dozen warnings on this page and you were already blocked twice. And now you say you dind't know we wanted you to stop? . It's not about changing one word, it's about your constant addition of unsourced material, including your WP:OR (example: [1]). I think you need those two weeks to think more about your behavior and to try to understand that you need to change something if several dozen people tell you that you should change something. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:50, 21 January 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.

--LegerPrime (talk) 05:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Viacom. You inserted statements in a number of articles, including Viacom, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, and The Walt Disney Company, saying that the companies were interested in purchasing The Weisntein Company. You used the same article as a source for each of these edits. The source says *nothing* that backs up the statements you've made. I note that you've made these edits just one day after coming back from a two week block for improperly citing material. Don't add a source unless it backs up what you're contending. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It did. --LegerPrime (talk) 21:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly in the article does it expressly state that Viacom, MGM, and Disney were bidding on The Weinstein Company? 青い(Aoi) (talk) 21:40, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I never said they were bidding. I said Viacom and MGM were interested and A&E Networks (which Disney-ABC Television Group owns 50% of), not Disney themselves, were interested. Hold on. I mixed up my sources. --LegerPrime (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article you cited did not mention A&E, Viacom, or MGM at all. If you mixed up your sources, that's fine; we all make mistakes, but please be careful when you copy and paste references because you inserted the same incorrect reference in three different articles. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 22:23, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced and vandalism into pages. If you keep doing it then you going to get blocked longer or indefinitely and/or page will get fully protected for unsourced and vandalism by 30/500 users. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:9158:3C4B:7629:188F (talk) 09:21, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

K. I set this up. Just give the word and I'll publish. "Following the Weinstein effect, Viacom and Lionsgate were on a list of potential buyers interest in acquiring The Weinstein Company.^[1]" --LegerPrime (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did Proposed acquisition of 21st Century Fox by Disney. AdamDeanHall (talk) 23:34, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. — Maile (talk) 23:55, 13 February 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).

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

Request reason:

I don't believe my edits were disruptive. I said, "any further acquisition plans". I added any because Wanda already made several prior (ex. Legendary Pictures, AMC Theatres) Also, I said Disney would obtain Fox's distribution rights to Star Wars Episodes I, II, III, V, and VI without having to wait for May 2020 if the Disney-Fox merger goes through. I cited my sources. Can you please unblock me? Are there other edits you weren't pleased with? If so, please tell me. --LegerPrime (talk) 04:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The problem is that your sources don't always say what you claim they say. In this particular instance, the source for Episodes I, II and so on does not say that the Disney-Fox deal means Disney doesn't have to wait - it cannot say that because it was written before that deal's specifics were ever published. What you do there is called original synthesis, extracting your own bits and pieces from sources that do not make those points, and it's not allowed. Huon (talk) 22:13, 18 February 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.

If you keep adding unsourced infomation and vandalism, then you are going to get blocked for years or indefinitely, get extended confirmed access revoked and/or pages will get fully protected for abuse by 30/500 users. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:781E:3420:E9BF:22AD (talk) 11:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Unsourced infomation from one user. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:781E:3420:E9BF:22AD (talk) 11:49, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In fairness, my recent edits since my last block were sourced when required. --LegerPrime (talk) 13:57, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Listed edits in AN/I is your edits that was reverted by someone. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:781E:3420:E9BF:22AD (talk) 14:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One of them were from before my last block. The rest are sourced. --LegerPrime (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One of Wikipedia users says you also do vandalism. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:781E:3420:E9BF:22AD (talk) 14:13, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When have I vandalized a wiki article? --LegerPrime (talk) 14:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You vandalized some wiki articles. The talk page warnings says "You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia" or "You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information". Some Wikipedia users says you vandalized Proposed acquisition of 21st Century Fox by Disney and Viacom. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:781E:3420:E9BF:22AD (talk) 15:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All of the unsourced edits I did on those were from before my last block. LegerPrime (talk) 15:15, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what's going on sith the IP -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:34, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On "sith the IP"? --LegerPrime (talk) 13:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

with. the w is too close to the s -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the IP was not happy with the edits they posted about at AN/I. Low blow, me thinks. You can post your responses here while blocked. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:44, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user edits is mostly unsourced infomation or vandalism. Wikipedia users may pick to extend the block to long-term or indef. Please read WP:INTREF, WP:VAND, WP:SOURCES and WP:CITE. 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:781E:3420:E9BF:22AD (talk) 13:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Village Roadshow Pictures. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You just got off a 3 month block. Please don't start adding unsourced content again. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:02, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The whole studio co-productions lists are unsourced. --LegerPrime (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just because someone else added unsourced content doesn't mean that you should, too. What would really be helpful is if someone checked sources listed in WP:FILM/R, such as the AFI Catalog of Feature Films, and added citations for the existing content. It's tedious work, but it improves the encyclopedia. I do this for some articles, but it's too much work for one person. If other editors were helping, we could source these articles properly and fix all the errors. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Petitions

Can we mention petitions in certain pages with their links in the references? --LegerPrime (talk) 22:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:Global Road Entertainment, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Also, see Help:Cheatsheet for basic wikitext markup techniques. Nardog (talk) 07:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Watchmen (film). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, LegerPrime. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (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) 02:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:28, 19 June 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I cited my sources. Regency and Dark Castle acquired the distribution rights to those films.

Decline reason:

Please explain what was wrong with this edit, where you incorrectly used imdb as a citation. Yamla (talk) 09:44, 19 June 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Aah. I see. I forgot to add the title, author, published date, access date and website name. I've just realized my error. My apologies. It won't happen again. --LegerPrime (talk) 13:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's not the error. See WP:IMDB. 331dot (talk) 13:46, 20 June 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Oh. I see. That article on IMDB in particular was taken from The Hollywood Reporter, which published it in 2002. I assume that doesn't change anything.--LegerPrime (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That isn't the issue. You'll want to read WP:IMDB, which 331Dot linked above. There is another hint at Wikipedia:Citing_IMDb#Inappropriate_uses. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 22:01, 20 June 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Alright. I see. So it's the fact that I used IMDb as a source at all. Now I understand. I apologize. I swear it won't happen again. --LegerPrime (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only; user abandoned this unblock request and made a new one, incorrectly leaving this unblock request open. Yamla (talk) 23:41, 9 July 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Under which category in Wikipedia:Citing_IMDb#Inappropriate_uses does my contribution fall under precisely? --LegerPrime (talk) 23:38, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Not an unblock requests. If you want to ask a question, do so without using the unblock template. If you use this template inappropriately again, you'll lose access to this talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:29, 15 July 2021 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

It's been almost a year. I swear I'll read through all the rules. --LegerPrime (talk) 15:47, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:00, 22 July 2022 (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.

.

Just a heads up, that is not an unblock request. I've already declined one - so I will leave this request to another admin. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 23:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I apologize. I incorrectly used an IMDb page as a citation and started edit wars. I swear I will not make anymore inappropriate changes in the future.LegerPrime (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Unblocking under the binding condition not to edit articles about movies, films, sitcoms, TV shows, and the companies that produce them. This condition can be appealed at WP:AN at any time, or at User talk:ToBeFree preferably after at least six months and having made 1000 contributions in other areas of the encyclopedia. Ideas can be found at the Task Center or the community portal. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LegerPrime, I'm generally open to unblocking, especially after a year. What currently prevents me from making this decision is your extensive block log and the history of warnings above. I'm afraid that your edits in the film/movies area have had a negative impact on Wikipedia and exhausted the community's patience multiple times. There is currently no way for me personally to trust you to suddenly edit productively in this area.

So I propose the following: You agree, as a binding unblock condition, not to edit articles about movies, films, sitcoms, TV shows, and the companies that produce them, anymore. There are many different topics to edit about, perhaps history or geography? And if you manage to do so for at least 1000 contributions and six months without getting blocked again, we can talk about removing this restriction, either on my talk page or at WP:AN.

I understand that I'm proposing to topic ban you from the main area of your editing interest, but it's all I can personally offer at this point. If you agree with the conditions, please ping me in response (e.g. {{ping|ToBeFree}} I agree not to edit articles about movies, films, sitcoms, TV shows, and the companies that produce them, anymore, until this condition is successfully appealed at [[WP:AN]] or removed by you.)

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: I agree not to edit articles about movies, films, sitcoms, TV shows, and the companies that produce them, anymore, until this condition is successfully appealed at WP:AN or removed by you. --LegerPrime (talk) 19:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging ToBeFree, I think the prior ping misfired due to the indent. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 02:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, indeed! Thank you very much, Rosguill. Sorry for letting you wait unnecessarily, LegerPrime. I'll ask NinjaRobotPirate for their okay. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That seems fine to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm forbidden to edit articles about movies, films, sitcoms, TV shows, and the companies that produce them. Does this include the talk pages? LegerPrime (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking. I chose the word "articles" instead of "pages" to ensure it doesn't affect talk pages. This is not meant to encourage you to spend a lot of time discussing the articles you are banned from, but it keeps talk pages intentionally open. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

Here's wishing you a welcome back to Wikipedia, LegerPrime. Feel free to remove any of the messages above, at any time, including the unblock templates and/or this welcome message.

Though you have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:03, 30 December 2022 (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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

^ "Weinstein Co Talking to 22 Buyers, $300 Million Expected Price, Bob Weinstein Must Exit". October 26, 2017.

[1] "Weinstein Co Talking to 22 Buyers, $300 Million Expected Price, Bob Weinstein Must Exit". October 26, 2017.

[1]