User talk:Londonlast21

Welcome!
Hello, Londonlast21, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! D P  10:22, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=615403371 your edit] to Soska sisters may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Following See No Evil 2, the twins also completed a segment for the upcoming " ABCs of Death 2" anthology series, and are currently filming "Vendetta". one of the "WWE

Reverted edits
I've reverted your edits at Truth or Dare (2013 film), as you removed a lot of information from the review section in a manner that suggested that you were trying to make the reviews for the film appear to be more positive than they were. I've left a message at the article's talk page, but I'd like to ask that you please not do this again in the future without proving that the coverage has greatly improved to warrant saying that the coverage was predominantly positive. You can do this by showing coverage in reliable sources (WP:RS) has overall improved. I'd suggested using one of the review aggregates (Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes) to show evidence of this, but neither site appears to back this up to warrant changing the reception section. Please understand that removing information in this manner without good cause can come across as disruptive and can even be seen as you doctoring the page in an attempt to make it more promotional. I'm not sure if you are someone involved with the film (if you are, please read over our WP:COI policies) or just a fan, but either way editing like this can and frequently has backfired on people in the past. I've seen where people tried to alter reviews for a film or sway things to make it seem like something (books, movies, products) received more praise than it did, only for people to not only find out about this but also assume that the people involved with the film were unable to take criticism. I've seen this happen quite frequently in the book world and I've seen authors end up with absolutely terrible reputations as a result. The biggest pity is that in some of these instances it wasn't the authors that were doing this, but rather random fans- however the authors were still the ones with egg on their face. I can't stress enough how important it is to just leave the reception section as it is unless you have very good proof to show that the page change is warranted. Wikipedia is supposed to cover things neutrally, which means that in most instances a film article will contain negative coverage. At this point just let the film's awards speak for themselves. Most people who watch gory and violent films like this know that reviews are very, very subjective because ultimately people either like these sort of films or not. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:08, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, please do not edit the article to cherry pick only the best reviews for the film. The reviews that are out there do not back up the idea that the critical reviews were predominantly positive. To be honest, the edits come across like you are trying to promote the film. This is not the first time that someone has done this on Wikipedia and people have been blocked because of actions like this. If you are part of the film crew hoping to edit the article to appear better in hopes of the film or anyone in the cast/crew getting good deals because of this, please stop. I understand that looking good can make a difference, but trying to deliberately skew data like this does not accomplish that and comes across very negatively to the general public. If you're a fan, family member, or a friend of someone involved with the cast/crew, please stop. You are not doing them a favor by doing this. I can't tell you how many times stuff actions like this backfired and made the cast/crew look like they were trying to hide, remove, or otherwise censor bad reviews in order to promote themselves, only for people to call the move desperate and unethical. And no, that's not my words on this- I've read plenty of articles and comments on other websites about actions like this. I don't mean for this to sound like it's me trying to be mean or threatening, just saying that stuff like this does get noticed by non-Wikipedia people and it leaves a very negative impression on others about the film, the cast and crew, and the director, because they'll start thinking that Jessica Cameron cannot take criticism for her films. I can't stress this enough and again I must mention the authors who have had careers ruined because of actions like this, sometimes because of actions that they themselves neither did nor endorsed. (Of course it was always worse when it was the authors doing this.) Leave the page as it is. If/when more coverage becomes available that shows that further critical reception improved, then that can be changed. Until then, leave the reception section alone and do not cherrypick reviews to be more positive. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Since I have warned you twice now, after this I will ask that another administrator temporarily block you as a warning. If this still continues after that, then it can lead to you getting permanently blocked from editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)