User talk:Thegeniusboy05

A Belated Welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Thegeniusboy05. I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help one get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! 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! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Aristophanes68 (talk) 06:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Titanic (1997 film) article

Hello, Thegeniusboy05. Regarding this edit you made to the Titanic (1997 film) article, I'm just dropping by your talk page to let you know that, in two of my recent edit summaries, I explained the reason that the text had been there. See this link. And, again, I'm sorry about that (the leftover text). Flyer22 (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity, though, what part of the removed text do you find ridiculous? I almost can't believe I even used the source mentioned in my edit summary. Flyer22 (talk) 19:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"And there's not going to be a sequel". I can see him pitching it as a wild idea that just might work. But the thought in your mind is not going to be "We can't make this movie - it won't have a sequel." So, if there's anything that I found solidly ridiculous about the whole quote, it was that.

Even if the quote is true, the writing of that paragraph still needs work. It reads more like a magazine than an encyclopedia...Thegeniusboy05 (talk) 04:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]