User talk:Thatnerdgreg

April 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (film), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Rdp060707&#124;Let's discuss about the plans 03:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Spider-Man: Far from Home, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. —El Millo (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

What was wrong with it? I’ve been adding onto pages with noted critically acclaimed acting what the singled out performances were, and those were indeed the singles out performances. Why did it have to be removed? Thatnerdgreg (talk) 20:21, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The lead section is a summary of the whole article. The only individual performances that should be mentioned should be those particularly highlighted throughout the reviews, not the three main characters all the time, which is what you've doing. Apart from that, if you are making the same kind of edit to a whole bunch of articles and you see multiple of them getting reverted, you should consider stopping, waiting or asking the reverters why they did so, instead of keeping at it. —El Millo (talk) 20:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Also see WP:NPOV and WP:CURLY before making further edits.  Some Dude From North Carolina  (talk) 20:29, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Mad Max: Fury Road, you may be blocked from editing. Chompy Ace 20:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Chompy Ace 20:52, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

That Dawn of the Planet of the Apea info I added is factually true based on this very site. The actors I noted were singled out very much were, as evidenced by their characters’ Wikipedia articles which talk about how the performers were met with acclaim for their work. If you want to remove that, fine. But it’s true. I’m done with this. Thatnerdgreg (talk) 21:03, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * In your edit, you added that praise was given to "particularly Serkis and Kebbell". Now, even though #Critical_response does mention Serkis (in 1 review), Kebbell isn't even mentioned, and most of the current reviews in that section go to the acting overall and that is why the lead says praise when to the "acting". Your edit/addition was not helpful, and as a result, it was reverted.  Some Dude From North Carolina  (talk) 21:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Your edits in the lead have to go along with the body of the article. Furthermore, please read WP:NPOV and WP:CURLY before continuing to edit; the phrase "very popular" is not encyclopedic and Wikipedia uses straight commas, not curly ones as you do.  Some Dude From North Carolina  (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

That’s a problem with the article as a whole then, particularly Serkis only being mentioned once when he was showered with praise. Thatnerdgreg (talk) 21:35, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, let's try to work with other editors to verify your claim (on this specific film).  Some Dude From North Carolina  (talk) 21:39, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Iago, you may be blocked from editing. Typically I'd give a less severe warning for the edit you made, but you make it difficult to assume good faith when it's clear you have a history of adding original research to articles despite several warnings to stop doing so. DonIago (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to offend. I checked and found references that I can add to the point I brought up, if I wrote about how some viewed him as the protagonist in the character folder with those references included, would it be allowed to stay? Because this is a valid topic that many have noted given he has by far he most lines, and he’s the true driving force of the narrative while Othello more reacts to his actions. Thatnerdgreg (talk) 19:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Without seeing what you're planning to add it's hard for me to weigh in, but I'd bear WP:LEAD in mind and limit any changes there to 1-2 sentences. This seems like a substantive topic and as such should have text added (with sources) to the body of the article, and then the lead can just hit the main point. Hope this is helpful! DonIago (talk) 20:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)