User talk:Misaerius


 * }

April 2011
Hi! You have been making changes to the Steadicam article without explaining what you're doing or why you're doing it. Please stop! This is not a one-person show; maintaining these articles requires cooperation and consensus among the editors involved. You may add information, but it must be VERIFIABLE and NOTABLE. You are not allowed to just "think things up" and stick 'em onto a page (see WP:NOR). The editing community welcomes your contributions here but you gotta follow the rules and guidelines! Thanks. &mdash; UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 17:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

--

Hi! Thanks for contacting and welcoming me! If you check the history of the Steadicam article, you can see that some anonymous users, with only ip adresses shown delete my contributions regularly, without explaining why. I didn't think things up, or only as much as anybody else here on Wikipedia.

How can I prove with scientific arguments that filmmakers use the word 'steadicam' on all kinds of camera stabilizer products? It's a fact like Sony's case with the Walkman, or Xerox's - people used to call photocopying xeroxing, before the company led an advertising campaign telling people to use the term 'photocopy' instead, to defend the company's name from becoming a generic trademark. There's much debate on film forum on the net, what exactly is a steadicam, and I thought it would be important to put an end to it, to share the latest verifiable truth people can agree with. This is Wikipedia, isn't it? I'm happy to discuss the issue, but deleting my contributions without any comments (this has been going on for a while before you showed up) is totally unacceptable.

So: what do you suggest, what should I do? --Misaerius (talk) 10:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)