User talk:PagingMrSaxaphone

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, PagingMrSaxaphone, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! User:MrRadioGuy ^{What's that?/What I Do/Feed My Box} 18:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Son Goku (Dragon Ball). When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 16:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Son Goku (Dragon Ball)‎, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put the reason in there. Assume good faith! PagingMrSaxaphone (talk) 18:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your reason is invalid. WP:BRD - you "boldly" removed large amounts of well-sourced content. It was reverted. You don't continue trying to remove it. Take it to the article talk page, but you need a much better reason for removing valid, sourced content that is referenced to third-party sources beyond calling the article "bloated". -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia is discouraged on Wikipedia. Sorry. That's an absolutely valid reason. The article is bloated and mostly a collection of trivia and repetitious plot summaries which are on the main page of this particular piece of sacred cow geekdom.PagingMrSaxaphone (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you actually read some guidelines and learn more about editing before deciding you have an appropriate idea of what is and is not appropriate, and before deciding you should just remove tons of soured information without discussion just because you don't like it. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know what unencyclopedic means and I know what trivia means. If you want Wikipedia to be a collection of useless TV trivia that's your perogative. I don't and I believe the Wikipedia rules pretty much state that. What's happened is that much of the content on Wikipedia is pop culture now. This is why Wikipedia is rightfully mocked on pages such as WikiGroaning and Unencyclopedia. Remove some of that content and Wikipedia may be taken seriously. As of now it's just another circle-jerk for the Yu-Gi-Oh card collecting nerds of the internet. It's sad because there's potential for Wikipedia to be a great project.PagingMrSaxaphone (talk) 16:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing the bloated trivia/references in other media from the Ruxpin wiki entry. I've been trying to get it removed for ages since it adds nothing. Mathue 04:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathue (talk • contribs)