Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:28, 16 June 2014

Theironminer, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Theironminer! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Misplaced Pages and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the TeahouseThis message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

QoS

1. See WP:BRD and stop edit warring on the QoS article: use the talk page if you want to reach a consensus. 2. "Mixed" covers everything: positive, negative and, well, mixed. It's utterly pointless and stupid to put mixed and positive: it covers the same points. This has been discussed numerous times in various places and at the film project, so if you want to change the consensus, you have to try and reach consensus through DISCUSSION, not brainlessly edit warring. - SchroCat (talk) 19:03, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

I consider your choice of words, saying I "brainlessly" edit the article. According to rotten tomatoes, any movie with 57%-69% means mixed-TO-positive reviews, meaning reviews were originally mixed and later became more positive. The consensus on the site called the film, positively, "an impressive entry to the Bond canon." I suggest you leave the article with the mixed-to-positive statement and not make a big deal about it. Just move on. - theironminer (talk). 12:10 AM, 16 June, 2014 (UTC)

Who gives a monkeys about RT, and what does that have to do with Misplaced Pages? There are many, many things wrong with RT, and We avoid the worst excesses of it, which includes how they describe the utterly brainless way they describe reviews. I see you have not bothered to read WP:BRD: you need to do so, or you may find yourself blocked for edit warring very soon. Briefly, you one of your edits is reverted, you DISCUSS on the article's talk page, rather than arrogantly trying to force your preferred version onto the page. I expect that someone will revert you shortly, because it's a bad edit, and if you decide to edit war yet again, I'll take great delight in reporting you in the appropriate forum. - SchroCat (talk) 04:31, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

By the way, this is an official notification of WP:3RR, the bright-line rule regarding edit warring. You are at the limits of reverting with you edit warring, and you have not bothered to even try and discuss the situation on the talk page. When it is changed back to the long-standing consensus, do not make a big deal about it. Just move on. - SchroCat (talk) 04:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Please do me a favor: go to the wikipedia page for the Date Night movie, read the reception, and see the rotten tomatoes page. I'd be intrigued to see your reaction. You say my contribution to Misplaced Pages is "brainlessly " and "poorly put together." I know you don't want to report me. It's just a page for a movie, what's the problem? Are you obsessed with the movie? Are you obsessed with Bond? Are you sensitive about what you edit? You are taking things so far that you're editing MY edits just to get even? That's not the way to go. We all want to contribute, yet you don't seem to be contributing. You just whine and make a big deal out of a James Bond movie article. Is it a fight you want? If so, it's a fight you WON'T get. Accept the edits and please move on. Because to tell you the truth, I'm American. Yep. Not British like in your world. And DON'T mess with my articles like Charlie Countryman. You just looked at that article just to tick me off because I was. That's an awful way to handle this issue. I like to share stories to the world like that movie, it makes me feel good. And when you go through it and say stuff about it, then you have a problem and you need help. Please leave my other edits out of this. - Theironminer (talk) 3:27 PM, 16 June, 2014