User talk:FriendlyCaribou

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, FriendlyCaribou! Thank you for your contributions. I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Cheers!--  Allied Rangoon‧talk   00:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

I don’t want to be officious (but I going to anyway), that you need at least 200 edit to become a rollbacker. Also you have to be part of the CVA unit. Sorry and thanks. Cheers!--  Allied Rangoon‧talk   00:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
Hi FriendlyCaribou. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! &mdash; MusikAnimal talk 04:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Be careful with semi-automated tools like Huggle and STiki. Don't go too fast.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

warning (sic)
Take a moment to read Don't template the regulars TEDickey (talk) 09:14, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, like I said, be especially careful with Huggle and STiki, don't go too fast. In Huggle the "default" queue should filter out, is one of them. If you're not using the default queue, make sure whitelisted users are filtered out to prevent mistakes like this from happening again. Thanks &mdash; MusikAnimal talk  14:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

X-Men
There was no need to revert the edits because I was updating the information according to the X-Men: Days of Future Past page at boxofficemojo.com. As of today, the film has grossed $509,591,109 worldwide. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=xmen2014.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.191.82.141 (talk) 18:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

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)

Bonapartesc92
How can i add the userboxes to my page please. Also thank you for the welcome Bonapartesc92 (talk) 10:41, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * All sorted for you :) FriendlyCaribou (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Birds of Prey review
Hi, I understand that people have balanced points of view regarding the film but this article in particular I have an issue with. The quotes used for the Wikipedia entry does not discuss the film directly, rather the journalist raging about how he felt the film shouldn't be made. It offers no critique or why exactly the writer of said article came to that conclusion, which other Wikipedia entries have done in the past.

Additionally, the film currently sits at 80% on Rotten Tomatoes, so the film isn't exactly polarising, but reviews like Kevin Maher's for The Times or Will Leitch's for Paste criticise the film without treating it like it was the most abominable thing ever written.

I am by no means Birds of Prey's biggest fan, but I think the choice of this article specifically and the quotes used paint an image that is meant to sensationalise rather than inform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobungogo (talk • contribs) 14:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I completely understand what you're saying - I think we can strike a balance however. I must confess that I may have acted a little swiftly rolling the change back - I am primarily a vandalism reverter and it is easy to become a little cynical (being a police officer in real life doesn't help with that either). Let's look at finding another quote to include that shows a critic not enjoying the film that is perhaps a little less sensationalist! FriendlyCaribou (talk) 15:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)