User talk:4TheWynne/Archive 7

Chris Hemsworth's Filmography
I added Thor: Love and Thunder to his filmography table and this change was reverted. Tessa Thompson has Thor 4 on her filmography, as does Taika Waititi. Therefore, I don't see how it is logical not to include it on Hemsworth's at this point, especially seeing as he is the lead and the film is in pre-production. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrumaLord (talk • contribs) 01:53, 19 January 2020 (UTC)


 * , as I said, read the note at the top of the filmography section: "Do not add films that have not begun filming yet per WP:CRYSTAL". It doesn't matter how big or how small the role; until the film has begun filming, nothing is absolutely set in stone yet, hence why we have this rule (this is also the reason why film articles aren't created until the film has started filming, as is the case with Thor: Love and Thunder). I have removed the film from Thompson and Waititi's filmography sections for the same reasons. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  02:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Disruptive?
What was? 2607:FEA8:F420:3DD1:F46F:A010:49B3:D109 (talk) 00:52, 3 February 2020 (UTC)


 * You made unnecessary additions to the band members section of Machine Head (band) which went against the usual formatting, an edit which was disruptive. Additionally, please don't add a new talk page section to the top of the page – use the "New section" tab at the top of the page, which will create a new section at the bottom of the page (editors are notified when they receive new messages on their talk pages). 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  01:07, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Load
...and here I thought they were reverting vandalism. Thanks for fixing.  Rob van  vee  11:06, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * , all good – I can definitely see how it would have looked a little suspicious, so I can understand the confusion. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  12:31, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

think its the same
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Afllivestream2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nrllivestream

sigh,JarrahTree 14:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Metallica
Why unneccesary?

DallasFletcher (talk) 10:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)


 * , there are already enough images in the article, and your image's placement wasn't very well thought out (placing it directly beneath another image doesn't look neat). Additionally, please don't add a new talk page section to the top of the page – use the "New section" tab at the top of the page, which will create a new section at the bottom of the page (editors are notified when they receive new messages on their talk pages). 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  10:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Sure, but there are already lots of images in the article. Why is a new one "unnecessary"? Also my image's placement is very clearly thought out, off to the side under another picture from the same time period where it belongs. DallasFletcher (talk) 16:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Paul Bettany
It will be a ‘sensible middle ground’ when he’s reverted from ‘English’ back to ‘British-American’ by someone else, which will inevitably happen at some point, so I’m changing him back as he has dual citizenship. By the way, I’m English, so there’s certainly no ‘English bias’ Scf1985 (talk) 13:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

AFLW minor prems
I'm not even sure if they're not regarded as official minor premierships. It's not like the league will ever clear this up, and its not as if the minor premiers from 2017-18 are any more "official" than 2019-20 just because conferences have been used since 2019. Why not include them in the minor premiership table and include a note saying conferences were used that season. It doesn't seem like wasteful content. For as long the league has conferences, there will always be a team that was technically no. 1 in the home and away season. Seems useful to include them, but hey not a hill im gonna die on if you feel strongly about it. Global-Cityzen (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Your revert:


 * , I can understand the thought process that there could always technically be a no. 1 team while the conference system is in place, but just consider the fact that the conferences aren't totally even and the team that has the best record/percentage might have had an easier run than the team which might have had one less win or been just below them on percentage (in short, there are a few problems that have arisen from having the conferences, as I'm sure you know). The 2017 and 2018 minor premiers are official (just as much as they are in the AFL), as there's a single ladder with one team on top, so I don't understand your argument there – as there are currently two ladders and, hence, two ladder-leaders, it's just not going to be looked upon in the same way. I just think it's a bit far-fetched and content for the sake of content, unfortunately. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  13:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Petty edits
Why are you so petty on my DragonForce edits? Literally every edit I make on page we both have interests in you feel the need to change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ObviouslyKieran (talk • contribs) 23:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * , I'm sorry, what? You've only made edits to the DragonForce article on four occasions in the last couple of years – the first time I reverted you because Killer Elite didn't need to be in the section header, and the last time I fixed your edits because you included original research and didn't fill out the reference properly; you were reverted by other editors on the other two occasions. What exactly am I doing wrong here? Whereabouts in this source does it say that the band is going to livestream some of the recording of this new album on Twitch just like with Extreme Power Metal? 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  00:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

hugh jackman
Since it appears you copied the same response from everyone else. My contribution on jackman's page was constructive, though constructive does not matter at all. It is based on clear and concise information with valid references. I believe the contribution was when he punched dolph ziggler and fractured his face on an episode of WWF Raw that jackman was hosting. If not, something else. Several articles posted online about it. Yet, later information stated it was a work (not real. (pretended)) 90% people do not follow policies on this website anyway and remove contributions that have valid references. Their deleting other people's stuff. Not contributing whatsoever. Many jerks (Not directed at you personally). Whether it was real or not, it should still be posted. I don't wish to have a response.

Majinsnake (talk) 00:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * , we discussed this issue over four years ago (see here) – why are you messaging me about it again? 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  01:34, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Ultra Beatdown
I changed the name of a song, as it was incorrect, and my edit got removed MasonDF (talk) 01:06, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * , your change wasn't sourced (and what was with the extra text?). 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  07:06, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Your music
I saw on your Wikipedia that u are a musician, I would love to hear some of your work Mafufu (talk) 11:35, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

WARCRAFT Cast
Hi Joshua, My name is Dean Redman, I am actor who was cast and directed by Duncan Jones and played two characters in the movie Warcraft. VARIS and CAGED FROSTWOLF. I am credited on many websites as such IMDB being the most prominent. A Wikipedia page had also been made about me years ago which lists WARCRAFT as one of my film credits. I have been in over 75 movies and shows as well as voiced many characters in animated series. I was flown to los Angeles with my manager and attended the Red Carpet World Premiere of WARCRAFT at the Chinese Theatre and then after party.

All of this information is true. I am a little new to website additions so please forgive me if an error was made however it was non intentional. All I am wanting is for my Warcraft lead cast credits to be honoured on this website like it is on so many other websites around the world. Acting is a very competitive field and a movie like WARCRAFT is a huge achievement.

Hope to have this cleared up, and would like to hear from you. have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.113.173 (talk) 14:15, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Only actors listed on the film's billing block are listed in the article's infobox, and additions anywhere else in the article need to be reliably sourced. If you really are Dean Redman, please also see WP:CONFLICT and WP:PROMOTION – what you're saying just isn't how Wikipedia works. Hope you understand. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  23:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

St. Anger
How was the Metallica edit disruptive? 2607:FEA8:F400:314:7843:87B8:9BBC:DAFB (talk) 04:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * We don't need to link instruments per WP:OVERLINK, and Hammett and Hetfield both simply played guitar, as opposed to lead and rhythm. Have you even listened to the album? It's pretty well-known for having no solos and very minimal lead playing of any kind. Also, again (I'm pretty certain I've spoken to you before), use the "New section" tab at the top of the page if you want to message me, as that will create a new section at the bottom of the page. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  05:06, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

How is my edit of Revenge of the Sith "disruptive editing"?
This review on Rotten Tomatoes called the film "emotionally powerful" on many occasions. https://www.cinencuentro.com/2017/11/12/star-wars-episodio-3-la-venganza-de-los-sith/

The critics' consensus called the film "poignant". https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_episode_iii_revenge_of_the_sith

Tomatometer-approved critic "Chris Stuckmann" said there is a compelling story in the film during his review. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHvoWFUCbio

I don't see anything wrong with pointing out the critics' praise of the "story" and "emotional weight". It is not my opinion. It is the critics' opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seleswarapu3 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


 * , if you're going to present sources like these, you would actually put them in the article, not just say "critics said __________" in an edit summary. You are only providing one example of each of the things that you are trying to add to the article and making it sound like several critics praised each of those elements, so to say that critics praised the story and "emotional weight" would be synthesis, which is combining material from multiple sources (which you weren't even adding to the article, hence why your edits were considered original research) to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. "It is the critics' opinion"; no, it isn't – one critic said this, one critic said that. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  17:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

How did the author of the page come up with terms like "action sequences", "musical score" etc. when describing which elements the critics praised? Why are those terms valid but not terms like "story" and "emotional weight"? Why can't I just add the terms "story" and "emotional weight" and include the sources of the critics' reviews that explicitly mention story and emotional weight? It is not synthesis, since the sources explicitly praise the 'story' and 'emotional weight'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seleswarapu3 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Statistics note on reduced game time for 2020 AFL players
Hey mate, just wanted to explain the note on Statistics I added to Dusty's page. It's absolutely necessary to leave in and to add to all players in the league, as the comparability of years is completely ruined given the temporary changes to game time this season. When seasons are presented in a single table, they are assumed to be comparable, but clearly the game time in this season is not. In future years, unfamiliar readers will assume every player got drastically worse this year when this is clearly not true. I've already begun applying it to all Richmond players in my normal maintenance of those 30-odd pages. And for what it's worth, I took the format from the notes applied to banned Essendon players from 2015.--DustyNail (talk) 04:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * , that's all fair enough, I just wanted to make sure the note about shortened quarters was being applied to all current players and not just some (as a lot of editors seem to do with different formatting edits, etc.). I don't see anybody objecting to us doing this if we were to try and create a discussion out of it, so I'll just add this to my to-do list. While I don't think that the 1994 comparison that I mentioned is completely irrelevant (it was literally shortening quarters from 25 minutes and time on to 20 minutes and time on), there were more instances of umpires blowing time off when the quarters were shortened (e.g. ball-ups, throw-ins) to the point where there wasn't a huge difference in the overall length of quarters, so I guess you could argue either way – I'm not as strong on that as my point about applying the note to all current players, though. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  12:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * , further, I think that the note should be copyedited/reworded slightly per this edit before implementing everywhere; I know it makes the note a little wordier, but I think it's a bit more succinct, plus it actually explains why the changes were in place for this season – any problems with this wording? 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  13:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Awesome. I like the copy edits. I'll go about implementing it on Richmond players as a priority over the next few days. I'm not one for engaging too deeply on the project talk page but if a discussion does come up there about it, feel free to ping me and I'll contribute a defense. Cheers --DustyNail (talk) 07:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * , take note of the changes here as well, as you can achieve the same thing with less characters (I know there's probably a 99.9% chance Martin's article is on your watchlist and you'd see it regardless, but just thought I'd bring it to your attention anyway given this is where we're discussing the note). 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  04:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Edits to Jobe Watson page
Hello. Not sure why you thought the edit's to Jobe's page "did not appear constructive"? It was literally linking to the website of the coffee shop Hole in the Wall where he worked while in NYC, which is also where he met his wife, and now has business interests in. This is pretty interesting to most people who know he worked a coffee shop in NY particularly to anyone visiting NY who may want to visit. Am I missing something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Financeofhospitality (talk • contribs) 20:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * , linking to websites instead of articles isn't really something that we do. Everything you're saying about how it's relevant to Watson and why it might therefore be of interest to some people is all well and fine, but I don't see what difference linking to the place's website would make. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  01:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Message Recieved
Hello 4TheWynne, I received a message from you that I made a change to a Callan Wards Wikipedia page after going on Wikipedia to view knowledge about the Battle of The Somme today. I am not aware that I changed any page yesterday and someone might be using a VPN to be at my IP address. 61.69.187.68 (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * That's all good – someone else probably made the edit from the same IP address, so if it wasn't you, feel free to disregard the message. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  07:43, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Sara Bareilles album
Dude, what’s your deal?

None of the other albums listed has a reliable source listed for its existence because it’s easy to confirm on one’s own that the album actually exists. It does. Here’s a second link to boot. Stop reverting entirely legitimate edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.6.100.195 (talk) 16:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I’ve now added the item back along with a paragraph with sources for the Little Voice series and Bareilles’s corresponding album. As a seasoned Wikipedia editor who’s since stopped contributing regularly, though, I’d strongly recommend you check out WP:AGF before reverting and disparaging an edit that was both harmless and ultimately legitimate as “disruptive,” though. Glancing at your other so-called contributions, it seems you’re more than a bit needlessly trigger-happy with that specific Twinkle button. Have a better day! 67.6.100.195 (talk) 19:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Darth Vader article
I am not engaged in "disruptive editing". You keep doing knee-jerk revisions; if anyone is being disruptive, it's you. Please stop. Treybien2 (talk) 09:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * , two things:


 * 1) I haven't edited the Darth Vader article (see here).
 * 2) I only reverted you once at the Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith article, and the warning was for you continually adding "screams" to the plot section without giving any reason and despite UpdateNerd reverting you three times and explaining why. Your editing pattern at the article is disruptive.


 * Do you even know what you're typing? 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  11:03, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

If it wasn’t you doing all the reverting, I apologize. But whoever is doing it, it’s obnoxious. “Devastating Vader” sounds terrible, and “Vader bellows” is worse. Treybien2 (talk) 13:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * , you do know how to view an article's page history (instead of just making assumptions), right? We're not the ones being obnoxious – instead of continually reverting and not providing an edit summary each time, you should discuss at the article's talk page if it means so much to you. For what it's worth, I disagree and think that "...devastating Vader" is more than appropriate, but we're all entitled to our opinions – because you were reverted, though, you need to discuss instead of continually trying to enforce it. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  00:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Jacinda Barclay
Hi 4TheWynne, I've just updated Jacinda's stats table, but whether I've done it correctly is another thing. I haven't worked on AFL tables before. I'd really appreciate it if you could check my changes if you have a minute? JennyOz (talk) 12:57, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * , already about halfway through doing it now – you haven't done anything wrong, which is great, but I'm updating the formatting, which most require updating anyway. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  13:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your updates. JennyOz (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Coldplay
They have 96.7 million in certified sales. It means their 100m records is no longer reliable since it's too low. At least I adding a reliable source for their 20m albums sales. Their records sales now at least 120m. But It's okay for me if my edits not usable. Politsi (talk) 04:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * , I remember you making some pretty bad/questionable edits several years ago, but this takes the cake... you are combining figures from two different sources (the one that you provided being fifteen years old, and therefore no longer reliable) to reach a higher figure not presented by either source; please read WP:SYNTH. Surely if you consider yourself "one of the main contributor for Wikipedia's List of the best-selling music artists", you would know how to properly source this information by now. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  07:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

My removal of something from Australian Rules Football page
Hey -- I will check to see what I removed; I typically only edit for things like "this has already been said earlier on the same page" or absolute non-sequitur info. I honestly don't remember what it was I had removed, so I can't tell you my reason at this moment, but I'm glad people like you have your eyes on things. I'm still confident whatever I did was a good change, but I'm okay with you undoing it, whatever it was. If I go look and see what it was and think it should be re-done, I'll be sure to explain it in the comment. Thanks again!

UPDATE -- I went and looked; your reversion was absolutely correct. I had simply not seen that there was a meaning for the caret, and thought it was a simple typo. My bad! Thanks for restoring it!

How is my edit "disruptive"?
So, on the 'St. Anger, Metallica album' article, under the 'Recording' sub-section, there are two photos of Jason Newsted and Robert Trujilo that are placed one on top of the other with the caption reading "Jason Newsted, left" and "Robert Trujilo, right". Because of them being one on top of the other, I edited the caption to say "Jason Newsted, top" and "Robert Trujilo, bottom".

Please explain to me why this edit may be "disruptive"

Have a nice day Bagpiper88 (talk) 01:30, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Paramore lineup changes
What should be done to highlight the lineup changes if a member page isn't necessary? Eight different members in the band's history with a lineup that changed eleven times. Would a lineup template on the band's page be a good idea (which was done with Chicago)? Sometimes, the lineup even changed during the recording of an album. Kart2401real (talk) 01:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)


 * , apologies for the delay in getting back to you here. Firstly, a band like Chicago is incomparable to Paramore (24 members vs eight) in this argument; subpages such as these are made necessary by the number of different members rather than the number of lineup changes. You need to understand what the purpose of these subpages are for; it isn't just another place where you can add a more complicated timeline and/or some tables that you wouldn't otherwise see in the band article (the table that you referred to on Chicago's article doesn't belong there, and should just be on its members subpage) – these subpages are for when a band has had a large number of members (I wouldn't say that eight is a large number here, whereas 24 definitely is) and its article contains so much information about members, lineup changes, etc. that it warrants being split into its own article to prevent the main article from becoming too long, not just to present the same information in a different format. While I still don't believe that it's necessary anyway, largely because the band has only had eight members and there isn't enough members-related information in the main article that warrants splitting into another article, I've moved the page to the draftspace (Draft:List of Paramore band members) so that you can try and get it to a point where you can convince me (and others) otherwise. At the moment, it requires a lot more (better) sourcing, particularly around early members, which members/session musicians played on what albums/songs, etc., and it should really contain more than one paragraph of text (which you've made the lead section), otherwise it just isn't long enough regardless of how many sources you use. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  06:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. Chicago actually went through 25 members. What about the Offspring (eight members in their history under that name), which has a page? Maybe the Offspring doesn't warrant a page. Jeremy Davis left the band before the instrumental tracks of Riot! were recorded and rejoined to record vocals for the last three songs to be finished. Davis also left the band after recording one song for All We Know Is Falling. Kart2401real (talk) 15:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I've updated my Paramore member article draft. Is it worth publishing yet?
Draft:List of Paramore band members is no longer just one paragraph. It has multiple paragraphs documenting the lineup changes and recording lineups not mentioned in the band's main article. Is this draft worth publishing yet? Kart2401real (talk) 03:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)


 * , no, it isn't – there are still key pieces of information, including the entire second sub-section and the Brian Weaver/Jeremy Davis Riot! notes, that are either unsourced, sourced incorrectly or could have better sources (band websites/biographies, for example, are often questionable). Touring members also do not need to be included in the timeline (which should mirror the one in the band article, in my opinion), and I don't think they even need require release contributions in their tables (release contributions should just refer to the standard versions of studio albums, live albums, EPs, etc. anyway). Please also see WP:LEADCITE. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  10:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What should I do to make the correct citations with Brian Weaver? He's credited in the liner notes. Any other sources that can be added? 15:25, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Why revert my edits on Robert DeLeo?
He plays guitar and keyboards, especially guitar, on the majority of Stone Temple Pilots albums. What's wrong with listing guitar as an instrument on the timeline? When the band releases an album, chances are Robert DeLeo plays guitar on it. Kart2401real (talk) 15:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)


 * , as I've said before, it's not his main role in the band, and "When the band releases an album, chances are Robert DeLeo plays guitar on it" is an exaggeration, as he's only played on one full album and a handful of earlier songs. Other examples of this kind of thing include Dave Grohl and Frédéric Leclercq (when he was in DragonForce) – Grohl recorded all instruments on the first Foo Fighters album and the drums for the second, but because they aren't part of his main role in the band, it isn't included in the section/timeline; same goes for Leclercq who, like DeLeo, recorded the odd guitar part or solo when he was in DragonForce, but again, it wasn't part of his main role in the band. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  02:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * He played guitar on Purple, Tiny Music... Songs from the Vatican Gift Shop, No. 4, Shangri-La Dee Da, and Perdida. Two albums also don't even have instrumental credits. He usually plays guitar on a few songs for each album. Do the majority of Foo Fighters albums feature Dave Grohl playing drums on a few songs? Kart2401real (talk) 03:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)


 * , I know which albums he contributed guitar for... if you want to be specific, he contributed to five songs on Purple, three songs on Tiny Music..., three songs on No. 4 and four songs on Shangri-La Dee Da, and then nothing until Perdida; that's only a small part of the band's catalogue. "He usually plays guitar on a few songs for each album" is just original research. Again – hopefully for the last time – it's not his main role in the band; otherwise, we might as well list all of the instruments he's contributed to the band's albums over the years. I understand that you like editing timelines and making them look the way you like them to (to an extent) – and some of your edits are good – but this just looks like you're exaggerating how much Robert DeLeo plays guitar for the band just so that you can add guitar to his bar on the timeline. Additionally, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians isn't somewhere where you take smaller issues like these that really just belong on the article's talk page; that talk page is for bigger issues/discussions across the project as a whole. 4TheWynne   (talk  •  contribs)  07:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I would not include instruments that he doesn't play on some songs for the majority of albums. Scott Weiland played keyboards on a few songs on two albums, but I don't think that merits adding keyboards to his timeline bar. Are liner notes a reliable source? Do liner notes count as original research? Kart2401real (talk) 16:51, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Why include keyboards on timeline for Taylor York?
If Robert DeLeo shouldn't have guitar listed on the Stone Temple Pilots timeline despite playing guitar on some songs on the majority of albums, Taylor York shouldn't have keyboards listed on the timeline. York only played keyboards on two albums since he joined. Robert DeLeo played guitar on at least five albums, a majority of his band's albums. Why the double standard? Either both should have their secondary instruments included, or they should have them excluded. Kart2401real (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)