User talk:Harlow1937

January 2011
Welcome!

Hello, Harlow1937, 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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Shearonink (talk) 03:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you are deleting information & sources (on this edit and this edit). Wikipedia relies on the verifiability of reliable sources. I'd appreciate it if you would explain your editing practices, including not using the preview button while you edit and why you aren't using edit summaries...if you had used an edit summary on that deletion, I wouldn't have to ask for an explanation on your talk page. Shearonink (talk) 02:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
As you continue to edit, a few things you might want to keep in mind: I can see from your edits on the Dorothy Dandridge article that you are very knowledgeable about her life and career, but not everybody is so knowledgeable and not every one who edits Wikipedia articles is a careful fan. Please source your contribution. If Wikipedia did not require proof of edits' accuracy then how could anyone say that Wikipedia is a factual encyclopedia? Please help Wikipedia out, follow accepted Wikipedia editing practices and source your edits. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 23:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit summaries are a nice way to let other editors know what you are doing.
 * The Preview button can keep the edit history from becoming clogged with cascading series of mistakes & corrections that all editors make.
 * Try to source your edits, Referencing for beginniners is a great tutorial to help you figure out referencing.



Just wondering why you removed various refimprove templates:

here at Jayne Mansfield

here and here at Kim Novak

here at Dorothy Dandridge

when the references weren't apparently improved?

Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 21:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Please stop removing 'refimprove' templates as evidenced here and here (at the Dorothy Dandridge article) when there is no evidence the references have been improved. Consult referencing for beginners if you need ideas on how to add sourcing to Wikipedia articles. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 03:10, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

So far as I can tell, you have done nothing to improve the references in the Dorothy Dandridge article and yet you have removed a Improve references template again (with this edit). Since you are obviously a fan, I don't understand why with your edits you are being so disrespectful of Miss Dandridge's career. Don't you think her body of work deserves to be sourced and referenced as much as any other movie-star's? Please source your edits, please improve the article's existing text as you add your own work. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 21:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd be interested in knowing what your rationale is in changing one header at Dorothy Dandridge from
 * Carmen Jones and career decline
 * ..to..

Even though much of Bizet's music remained in place, the musical Carmen Jones (with its Oscar Hammerstein II lyrics & book) is a different production than the opera Carmen. Dandridge was cast in the movie Carmen Jones not the original George Bizet opera...possibly confusing the two for the casual reader should be avoided. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 03:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Carmen and career decline?

Malaga
Hi. You recently started a new article about a film, Malaga, but you put the new information within the existing article, Carmen Jones (film).

I removed it from there, and made a new page for it - Malaga (1960 film).

It needs references. See WP:VRS and, for help, WP:REFB.

Thanks!  Chzz  ► 21:27, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello!
Hi there!

I notice you've had a few problems, editing.

I have 'collapsed' the earlier messages, so that I could talk to you.

It looks like you're trying to add good information to Wikipedia - and that's great; but, there are some problems with the formatting and style.

I'd like to help you, if I can.

Please reply, below, and we can talk - I can help explain about references, and how to make a 'draft' page, and anything else you need.

Just edit this page, and add your messages at the end.

I hope to hear from you soon. Best regards,  Chzz  ► 22:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Harlow1937 - was wondering why you deleted the Wiki-link to Edmund Purdom's Wikipedia article with this edit in the Malaga (1960 film) article. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Harlow1937 - You reverted the correct and verifiable Edmund Purdom link in the Malaga (1960 film) article again. If you would explain why you did so here on your talk page, that would be great. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 13:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at The Murder Men (film), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I am sorry. You simply are not responding, so there is no option; it is essential that facts are verifiable.  Chzz  ► 21:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Harlow1937 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page.  Chzz  ► 00:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)