User talk:Tamz95

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 05:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC) Anyway, I could continue, but the overall impression I have is that you're here to elevate actors you feel are better than others, you're here to promote some films and slam others, you're here to be disruptive, you're here to fabricate and vandalise, and that's simply a waste of community time. Find another hobby. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:28, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) In these changes, you blatantly vandalise Spyder's gross and add nonsensical editorial content about the film being a "commercial failure", a "box office bomb", and describing someone an "Unfit Actress" (none of these descriptions would be appropriate for a neutral encyclopedia.)
 * 2) In this edit, you rearrange a cast list with no explanation or apparent reason to do so.
 * 3) In these edits you create new "starring" credits for actors without an explanation and you rearrange another cast list without explanation or reason to do so.
 * 4) More unexplained cast reordering here.
 * 5) Here you claim that a film is based on another work, without providing a reference. You also fabricated financial data, and threw in a little more editorial spin on the film's critical and commercial response.
 * 6) More unexplained cast reordering here
 * 7) This actually appears to be a constructive edit.
 * 8) Here you fabricate more financial data
 * 9) Here you remove a reference without an explanation.