User talk:KeithLD

.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Inception (film) was changed by KeithLD (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.888686 on 2010-11-29T05:09:23+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

From one plot junkie to another
I admire the writing I've seen from you so far. If I can ever help out on a tricky plot let me know. Happy editing! Millahnna (talk) 09:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Answers to your questions
1. Heat: I'd say just go for it. The article is tagged as needing a shorter plot (and has been for almost a year) so you shouldn't get any major complaints. I'm sure there will be a few minor revisions after you drop it in but that's pretty normal.

2. Inception: Since it was so hard to get a plot in there to begin with, I'd wait a couple more days to see if any more editors have comments. There was a lot of disputing about the content of that section back when the film first came out so it's going to be a bit tricky. If the section still doesn't have a lot of response by Saturday or Sunday, my suggestion would be to drop a note on the talk page of the Wikipedia Film Project to ask for input from other editors to help form a consensus. I was actually planning on doing this myself if you didn't have any more feedback by then so you don't have to worry about it if you don't want.

3. Consensus in general: I have a feeling I'm not going to explain this very well (fair warning in advance). The time it takes to form consensus will vary greatly from article to article. With fiction related topics, the more room there is for interpretation of story elements, the trickier it is going to be (thus Inception, Shutter Island was another tricky one). You won't always need to ask on the talk page to change a section. Being bold in your editing is often advised. But if you plan to make a major change to an article that isn't tagged as having a problem, I would advise the talk page route just to avoid the hassle of an edit war. Likewise if your bold changes are challenged and reverted. It's something you sort of get a feel for as you work on stuff around the site.

4. Watching a page: When you edit a page, right below the edit summary box is a check box that says "watch this page". That's an easy way to follow a page when you're in the middle of making edits. Also, across the top of any page you should also see either a little star (by the read, edit, and history tabs) or something indicating a "watch this page" type of link (how this looks varies by skin). Click that and you're good to go; you'll see any changes to that page or its related talk page in your watchlist.

Did I forget anything? Millahnna (talk) 09:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Hannibal
I just wanted to say that you did a great job with plot summary edit on Hannibal. I jumped the gun in reverting you the other day. Let me know if I can ever be of any assistance. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 00:54, 20 December 2010 (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) 14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)