User talk:Harryhenry1

August 2015
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Nostalgia Critic episodes (2007-2008). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. You have reverted edits that are applying the policy WP:COLOR and against the discussion at Template talk:Infobox television season, to make colours used in infoboxes WCAG 2 AAA Compliant, as per the list at Category:Articles using Template:Infobox television season with invalid colour combination. Such reverts may be viewed as vandalistic, and you may be warned and/or banned if you go against policy. Please inform yourself before reverting and warning falsely. Alex &#124; The &#124; Whovian 08:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Diary Of A Wimpy Kid - Greg Heffley's Journal
You reverted my edit of the subject series, per:


 * Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Difference between revisions

Your note: Can you give some sources as to who's used this alternate title?

Did you try Google?!? I did and here are some prime examples:


 * [Amazon Diary Of A Wimpy Kid - Greg Heffley's Journal]
 * [Books-a-Million Diary Of A Wimpy Kid - Greg Heffley's Journal]
 * [Bibliocommons Diary of A Wimpy Kid - Greg Heffley's Journal]

Apart from anything, the sub-title is the only clear way to distinguish the fist book from the series of the first name.

Does this compute? :)

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) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Editnotice about TTR content in the TTO article
Hey there. This is just a heads up about an editnotice request that I've put up here: Template_talk:Editnotices/Page/Toontown_Online. Please feel free to revise this if you have any improvements to make. Also, you're doing a great job of maintaining the article, keep it up  Nott Nott   talk &#124;contrib 20:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Trivia for Super Mario Bros
I thought a lot of pages have a trivia section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoxMcCloudsWife (talk • contribs) 02:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't really approve of Trivia sections, since the site feels that the info seen in trivia sections is better placed into the rest of the article. Here are the full details:WP:TRIVIA Harryhenry1 (talk) 02:57, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk pages
Hello, I saw you reverted the edit of mine on Talk:Data Design Interactive. In case you didn't know, talk pages are meant to hold dicussions that are to improve the article, however, this talk page is filled with the company's CEO Stewart Green posting why he knows everything and disagrees with the content of other, therefore no sign of improvement. On top, everything is only handeled by random anonymous users, only 3 comments are actually by real users (two of them by you), whichfor I went to delete the content. It is the same as it happened to Talk:Lego Island, where a lot of off-topic conversations and biasing went on, where removals were undone by another anonymous user all the time. I would prefer if we had this content removed, so tell me if you disagree. Lordtobi ( &#9993; ) 10:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Why not just collapse the discussions instead of outright deleting them?Harryhenry1 (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Because collapsing is for discussions to be archived. These discussions are off the guidelines and therefore content to be deleted; we do not want to archive disputed discussions. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 20:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Facebook
Why did you reverted my edit on Facebook for no reason? Pranish &#124;Message 01:16, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not giving a reason first. The reason I reverted that was because Mark Zuckerberg's name had already been linked to in the infobox.Harryhenry1 (talk) 01:53, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That's fine... but as far as I know, there's no problem adding another wikiLink Pranish &#124;Message 01:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Considering how close the two names are in terms of space between them, there's not much point linking to the same name again. Harryhenry1 (talk) 05:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but it looks awkward Key People : Mark Zuckerberg and no link! Pranish &#124;Message 05:25, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to join WP:DOAWK!

 * Feel free to add your name under the "members" list! Thanks :) →  The Pancake of Heaven!  13:47, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made&#32;to Steven Universe: you may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Murph 9000 (talk) 06:12, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Question about Steven Universe and infoboxes
Why have you been putting screenshots from Steven Universe episodes in the infobox, and moving the promotional art to the rest of the article? Harryhenry1 (talk) 03:37, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * TV Episodes infoboxes usually countain a screenshot, typically to illustrate a key moment or a key element in the article. In the case of "The Answer", it wasn't even a concept art that was used in the infobox but the cover of the book adaptation, which means that the only articles that originally had concept art in their infoboxes were "Mr. Greg" and "Mindful Education". The reason I replaced them, outside of making it similar to other articles, is because I believed that the screenshots I chose were more relevant to the content of the episode, or could be used to illustrate something important about it. In "Mr. Greg", it was the fact that the characters are performing a song (to highlight that it is a musical episode) and also to show that they wore suits for most of it and explain why. In "Mindful Education", I throught that the picture was more relevant of the episode's story and message, but was also showing a key moment that was worth explaining with a visual support since it is a visual scene without any actual dialogue. Hope those reasons are good enough, I just wanted to improve the articles. --Hyliad (d), 13:00, 1 march 2017 (CEST)

Orphaned non-free image File:Elimination Arcade Flyer.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Elimination Arcade Flyer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay
Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.

Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.

Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics.  Schwede 66  09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2023 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Citation formatting
Thank you for reverting the change on the Mark Felton talk page. I don't understand what was happening but I couldn't get the page to format correctly, I guess you noticed that too. I don't know if it was something that I introduced into the page or some other formatting. In any event that page is way too long, I guess someone should start a bot on archiving it. Regards, Spintendo  05:44, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Stop reverting my edits
You reverted my edits in Ron DeSantis article without a proper explanation. All you wrote was "rv biased edits". Firstly, it's not bias, those were facts, and I pinned reliable sources for them. Also stop putting "right-wing" in Maine and Pennsylvania Republican parties' articles. They are not sourced. I will have to report you, due to your sitewide edit wars Udehbwuh (talk) 10:07, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The additions to DeSantis don't seem to have been made in good faith, it's not something a nonpartisan editor would've done. Plenty of detail in infoboxes aren't sourced either, since it's the same information that'll be sourced in the article, so why try to erase the descriptor of being right-wing? Unless there's a new consensus I'm unaware of, I don't think anyone would object to the description of republicans are right-wing. For that matter, threatening me like that is uncalled for and my reverts can't be called edit wars anyway. Harryhenry1 (talk) 12:38, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @Harryhenry1 what do you mean "something a nonpartisan editor would've done"? Firstly, we rely on what reliable sources say. Not on someone's opinions or assessment. It's a fact, that the unemployment rate in Florida is lower than 2%. It's not an opinion. It's data from the US Labor Statistics. And what about biden's words, it's literally his statement, it's not like i made it up, it's what he himself said. So I don't understand, what you are talking. I provided reliable sources for each edit I made.
 * And political positions in infoboxes are often sourced, like here The Guardian, here Democratic Party (United States) and here Republican Party (United States). And again, it's not like "I don't think anyone would object...", you need to provide reliable sources for your claims. Udehbwuh (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * What Biden said about DeSantis is meaningless. I'm not denying he said it, but politicians saying something nice about their ideological opponents is a common, and not very noteworthy thing to include. The only reason you'd have something like that added to an article is to make DeSantis look better.

And as for the unemployment statistics, again not denying those numbers but it's not even the lowest one per state in the country. It seems to just be there to, once again, make DeSantis look better. Harryhenry1 (talk) 13:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Why do you think these are not "noteworthy things to include"? Where in wikipedia guideline and rules is it said? Please, read this WP: Original research Udehbwuh (talk) 14:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know what original research is. This isn't that. There's certainly room to argue about what is or isn't notable to include, but again I can't see any reason why to mention Biden's comments on DeSantis other than this specific agenda. Harryhenry1 (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It's fact, that DeSantis was praised by both sides. It's not pushing an agenda. I'm just reporting, what reliable sources say Udehbwuh (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, not denying what they said. Generic bipartisan support moments like this happen all the time, but are they actually noteworthy to include in an article? Harryhenry1 (talk) 14:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Edgar Rice Burroughs
Hi Harryhenry- when you revert someone's edits please add a summary or drop a line in the talk page. I updated the talk page with more explanation behind my cut when I made it, so you could pop something there. My edit was not a political matter either way.

About my recent edits
I've done some extensive research and the credits for all the Walking With miniseries episodes only credit the BBC as a whole, not the Natural History Unit or the Science Unit. I don't believe the Science Unit was a dedicated division until after the BBC Worldwide/Studios merger in 2018, but I don't know for sure. The source only labels it as the BBC anyway. Luigitehplumber (talk) 03:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, my apologies. I was unable to access the source in question. Harryhenry1 (talk) 04:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Curious
Any particular reason you are patrolling every place i edit or post on a talk page? Holydiver82 (talk) 04:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
⇒  SWAT Jester   Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute_resolution_noticeboard regarding state of Sweet Baby Inc. article. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Sweet Baby Inc.".The discussion is about the topic Sweet Baby Inc..

This notification was issued considering your recent contributions to the related talk page.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--Moon darker (talk) 06:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

March 2024
Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the Monster House (film) plot summary have been removed because they added a significant amount of unnecessary detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You 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. 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. DonIago (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I thought I was removing and clarifying the plot from previous attempts to make it longer. I'll still put in the warning about not adding an exact date for any future editors. Harryhenry1 (talk) 13:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Captain Underpants and the Invasion of the Incredibly Naughty Cafeteria Ladies from Outer Space (and the Subsequent Assault of the Equally Evil Lunchroom Zombie Nerds), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spaceship. 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) 05:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

List of biggest box-office bombs
I think we're getting trolled on that talk page. Instead of responding, I would start removing general questions like this one as disruptive spam that wastes the community's time. This IP in particular has posted at least 8 other similar threads since August 2023. My 2¢ --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Animated films sourcing etc
In my opinion, go forth and remove unsourced content regardless of who put it there, but as usual, even if someone inserts unsourced material back, we have to obey 3RR and wait for others to intervene, which they will in all likelihood do if the material is unsourced and not encyclopedic. There's no freeze on editing while an ANI is going on, just a caution to maybe be extra careful, but if you're editing within the Five Pillars anyways, there shouldn't be a problem! You don't need anyone's permission to undo the damage caused by someone else's disruptive editing so long as your mitigations are not themselves disruptive. lizthegrey (talk) 03:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay
Okay, I got it, imdb is a unreliable source. I won’t start a edit war over this. Nice and simple.😊 Iamamodforjellymario (talk) 04:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Link: The Faces of Evil and Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon
Hello Harryhenry1, you recent reversion of my reversion to restore an edit was based on summary "..keep the word count down to a certain length." I would like to point out that per WP:NOTPAPER, there is not a necessity to keep the word count low. Although Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information, the plot section did not boast a very significant part of article, given that other comparable sections are included too. But guidelines may have exemptions if proper reasoning is provided which the IP didn't, however if you have one, it would be great to discuss. Regards, Exclusive Editor  Notify Me! 13:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * There are guidelines for summaries to keep the word count on the lower end for readability, such as WP:VG/PLOT for games, or MOS:FILMPLOT for films. I also had a concern that the article was more focused on describing certain cutscenes beat for beat, which are unnecessary in a summary and seemed to just be catering to, for lack of a better word, the "meme culture" surrounding the game. That specific article was also discussed at User talk:Cogsan. Harryhenry1 (talk) 15:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your clarification, but do you know what is 400-700 rule? Is it even a formal/ informal title of any guideline? Also if you know more about the game, you may help by ensuring that the removal of sources in that edit does not affect the overall quality. Best regards, Exclusive Editor  Notify Me! 15:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know what the rule means. The Manual of Style entries I brought up show what I mean. Harryhenry1 (talk) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I guess you misunderstood me. I know you know what that MOS means, but the IP who made that 'reasonable' edit wrote in their edit summary Trimmed the plot to obey the 400-700 Wikipedia rule. But it seems that no such rule called "400-700" exists, so IP is making their own rules, although their edit here was okay. Exclusive Editor  Notify Me! 06:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

My mistake
I accidentally reverted your edit adding back "anti war activist" to the lead of Donald Sutherland. It was something I added once upon a time and I didn't even know it had been disruptively removed back in November. I reverted my own accidental edit of your material. I also added a level 2 disruptive editing warning to that IP editor's page. Finally, I would like to thank you for a good catch. Cheers. Kire1975 (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

WP:Wikihounding (Juli 2024)
You might well be right about the antinatalism revert, but I'd still like to hereby definitively warn you not to engage in any more obvious "stalking". There is good reasons for this rule being in place. Biohistorian15 (talk) 13:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Is it still fine to make edits like this? Harryhenry1 (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I guess so. I think I fixed the problem. Biohistorian15 (talk) 09:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024 - Decisive warning
You are, again, engaged in behaviour that is clearly some version of Wikihounding by proxy.. I would like to hereby ask you to disengage. If not, it's blatant canvassing; and a ~12 yo user acc. also knows that much. Biohistorian15 (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)