User talk:STCooper1

April 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia! Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, your recent edits to the plot sections of the Shere Khan article added a significant amount of unneeded detail and have been reverted. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You are welcome to use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 15:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

True Grit

Hi,

I would make the same point that Doniago made above but with regard to the changes you've made to the True Grit article. The detail is excessive, and plot sections aren't meant to be exhaustive, blow-by-blow accounts of the film. I've started a section on the discussion page of the article raising this point. The same applies to the changes made to Prey (2007 film) as well. Please do have a look at the plot summary edit guides as Doniago suggests. Arthur Holland (talk) 23:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tyler - don't worry about it -- I can see that you were trying to improve the article (and I was probably a little grumpy with my post above). Like Doniago, I took a while too getting the hang of all the policies and guidelines (still haven't got my head round all of them), so please do keep contributing to Wikipedia. If you have any queries about policy/guidelines and whatnot in the future by all means drop me a message and I'd be glad to help if I can :-) Arthur Holland (talk) 17:49, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blackbeard

Please stop making changes to this article. Your edits are unencyclopaedic and do not reflect the sources cited. Parrot of Doom 23:36, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in List of Naruto characters, makes articles harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 01:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tsavo maneaters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Henry Patterson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Life with Derek, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jaws

Watch the scene again carefully.[1] The machete does not go into the shark's brain: it's below his eye. Quint has little chance to put up a "bloody fight" unless you are talking about his own blood (from being bitten in half). If four different editors are removing your plot details, it's best to think that something may possibly be wrong with them. Doc talk 07:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

Hello, I'm MartinPoulter. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, Tom Cruise, but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. 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. MartinPoulter (talk) 22:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, STCooper1. I'm afraid I've reverted you again at Tom Cruise—the third editor to have done so. Please don't reinsert the content (see policy on edit warring). If you think it belongs in the article, the appropriate next step is to open a discussion at Talk:Tom Cruise. Rivertorch (talk) 07:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Signature song, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! 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. SummerPhD (talk) 02:33, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content 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.--John (talk) 05:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will revert your edit and remove my add in about the wolf episode on Manhunters(drama), but the leopard one will have a reliable source cited, so I will leave that. That reliable source will be Corbett's book. Its done now. STCooper1(STCooper1 (talk) 06:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for finding a source. I still have some questions abut the material you have added. I will raise them in article talk and ping you here when I have done so. --John (talk) 09:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've now done that. It is basically still way too long and needs to be cut, but we can best discuss that at article talk rather than here. --John (talk) 09:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of Sherlock characters

Hello. I think you misunderstood what the character says in His Last Vow. He clearly has no hard copies of the dirt - this is what the whole plot revolves on. The reference to "sending for something" means sending a reporter or something like that. Mezigue (talk) 09:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Hello, I'm Laser brain. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Lion without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Laser brain (talk) 11:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lion

Twice you have removed information from the article [2] [3]. The first time, you didn't bother with any explanation, while the second time you used a completely false rationale. The information you deleted WAS sourced properly, and in fact, you deleted the book source that verified the claim with your edit. Please familiarize yourself with WP:V and WP:RS and be more careful when editing, and do not remove key sourced information unless there has been a clear consensus developed on the talk page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:35, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Your recent editing history at Tenth Doctor shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
If you feel the information should not be there, please discuss on talk page, but do not edit war on its removal. MASEM (t) 05:23, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Hello, I'm Prhartcom. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Kim Davis (county clerk), 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. Prhartcom (talk) 17:14, 29 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) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, STCooper1. 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]

May 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Wild Bunch, 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. David J Johnson (talk) 10:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, STCooper1. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, STCooper1. 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]

Important notice

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

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

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

Please read the standard notice above, and please don't add material not supported by the sources. Neutrality^talk 15:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The cited source does not refer to "liberal media sources" - that is your own editorializing. Neutrality^talk 17:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Shearonink

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:George Washington § Wikilinked "General of the Armies" in opening sentence, preceding the subject's name. Shearonink (talk) 00:23, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Acre (1799), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Caldiero. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]