User talk:EEBuchanan

74.75.9.45: so, why did you delete many of my parts of the Uglydolls page, just a reminder I’m a sucky editor and below 16 years old...

I’m such a noob here :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.9.45 (talk • contribs)

Hi, I put this on your talk and your other IP's talk, though I warned you there using more than one IP during a block is sockpuppetry and a BIG rule violation, on WP, so I hope you do not respond to this with any IP until your block is up. But just making sure you see it here is my answer. In response to your question on my page, you are clearly well-intentioned so I'm making this list to help you out since you are new and self-admittedly not experienced:

A lot of your edits contained either poor grammar or simply extended the length of the article without adding any new information and therefore were nonconstructive. Grammar is easily checked - read the sentence aloud carefully three or four times after you edit it. If it doesn't flow right/sound professional, it's almost certainly wrong.
Wikipedia is not Fandom, this is an encyclopedia. Things work a little different here. I get why you're having some issues, I had some when I first joined because I came here from being an editor on the Redwall Wikia (a Fandom site). On Fandom sites, they are basically expanded Wikipedia articles and you can add as much information as you please so long as it fits that wiki's guidelines, though you probably should still check that your grammar is all right. Articles here, however, are for informational purposes and we must keep as professional and encyclopedic an atmosphere as possible.
See the sandbox and the Teahouse and the Manual of style for more info on how to make constructive edits and be a useful contributor. If you have genuine, sourced information to add to articles it is always welcome. It just helps to know the guidelines, that's all, if you don't want editors reverting what you did.
It helps to use the article's talk page for discussion instead of private talk pages if it's a question regarding to a specific article. Also check edit summaries on articles to see why your edits were reverted, sometimes the answer is there.

I know this is long but it's all essential. I put this on your other IP as well. I hope this helps! :-) EEBuchanan (talk) 02:10, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of Keeping Up Appearances characters has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: List of Keeping Up Appearances characters was changed by EEBuchanan (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.854657 on 2019-01-05T15:20:17+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:20, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Barbie Dolphin Magic. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Please read WP:FILMPLOT, which sets a 700-word limit. Binksternet (talk) 00:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hatari!, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages German and Italian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rio Lobo

I have reversed you again, per WP:FILMPLOT. You have been editing long enough to know that edit summaries should be short, not a defensive essay. The place for that is the Talk page, where you should go now to establish consensus. I see you have already been warned about inappropriate tone in your edits and it is partly on the ground of the amount of slang in your edits (and of others who have contributed) that I intervened. WP requires encyclopedic language, not film-fan cliche. The summary, if you look at the guidance, also advises brevity: 700 words is the absolute maximum, not a requirement to bring in small details and interpretation. Guidance gives an acceptable minimum of 400 words, remember.

Going by the tone of your wordy 'summary', you seem to take the attitude that accuracy to your sense of the film is the main requirement of editing. Equally important is working as part of an editorial team and keeping in mind that other varieties of language than American colloquiality (eg that of the film) are more appropriate to other readers. And again, decribing Amelita as "conflicted" is interpretive and unnecessary. It belongs, suitably sourced (and that doesn't mean the primary source of the film itself) in a separate section on its psychological dynamics - or whatever. Take a look at WP:SOURCE, the spirit of which should be guiding the summary even if sources are not required there. They aren't required because interpretations that are contentious clearly don't belong there.

To my eye, the plot should be shortened and all colloquiality purged. I invite you to co-operate with me to make the article more acceptable by editorial guidelines. Simply trawling thru articles "to correct inaccuracies" (your words) is only one part of an editor's job. Sweetpool50 (talk) 09:45, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Court Jester

EEBuchanan, your edit of the plot for The Court Jester absolutely amazes me. Have you even viewed the movie. Your "plot" is from a different movie. I am reverting it to the true and rightful plot. What you did was vandalism. WP:VANDAL

Osomite ^hablemos 21:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your comment on The Court Jester talk page

@EEBuchanan: Sir, I find you disingenuous. I have not made a "personal" attack on you. I have stated the truth and you take offense.

Seriously, you can not actually think what you edited as the "plot" is accurate. Please, watch the movie, take notes. I assure you that when I edited the plot some time ago I had watched the movie twice, took notes, and provided an honest plot. I also did not editorialize the plot as you did. Editorializing the plot is not acceptable. I am not overly impressed with the results of your "claim" of over two hours of scholarship and editorial effort.

About a plot length of 700 words. The plot I have edited is 710 words. Note that 700 words is guidance and not dictum. You probably didn't even know how many words it contained.

If you persist in this nonsense I will make a complaint about your behavior.

I will be reverting your last edit because it is not correct. Again, I point out that your edit is basically vandalism.

Osomite ^hablemos 22:44, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Singin' in the Rain

Hi. I have reverted an edit of yours on this article, and would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached (see WP:STATUSQUO).

Also, please note that WP:FILMPLOT is an editing guideliine, and is not mandatory. I have carefully examined the plot section of this article, and there is no excessive verbiagem especially considering that the film is considered to be one of the best film musicals ever made. The names of cast members and the titles of songs are very helpful to the reader, and should not be removed. If you disagree, make your argument and get a consensus. Note that the plot section has been extant in this condition for wuite a long time, indicating de facto agreement with its condition. The onus, therefore, is on you to convince other editors that your version is superior. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:17, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Barbie as the Island Princess, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Azul.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About edit summaries

We appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, specially to film-related articles. However, I'd personally like to point out how your edit summaries related to the Despicable Me films seem aggresive at best and hostile at worst; no matter how atrocious an edit is, most editors try to react to it with professionalism. Remember to be civil and that edit summaries are meant to describe the changes done to an article in the most objective way possible. Greetings -Gouleg🛋️ (Talk • Contribs) 15:25, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I came here to point out that this[1] is unnecessarily hostile. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chisum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Fe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rio Bravo (film)

Please read WP:OVERLINK and stop overlinking everyday words. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 10:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited How Ridiculous, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RAC Arena.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I just wanted to apologise for my edits on Trolls (film) if it made you upset. I just wanted to explain about how it was impliced that Creek's captive was a trap and how he wasn't really a zen, and Poppy's happiness got destroyed by him.

Thank you for responding! I am far from upset. I was a newer user myself once and am still learning and have made mistakes. I was simply trying to explain to you something that had to once be explained to me, before someone reports and blocks you (I have refrained from doing so because I think that was a bad way to settle things with someone who isn't a vandal). IMPORTANT INFO YOU SHOULD KNOW:

On sites like a fandom wiki, or an IMDB website, you want to put every last detail in plot summaries. However, Wikipedia is not a fansite but an Encyclopedia, for informational purposes. Plot summaries here also are for encyclopedic purposes, and therefore the rules are different. You have to keep it under 700 words and be VERY selective and only put the most basic/"High points of the story" information, omitting any side details (See WP:FILMPLOT).
When I use the word "redundant", that's a grammar term that means you can only say something once, implications included. For instance, in any dictionary, the definitions of "despair" and "heartbreak" and "Destroyed happiness" are so similar, you don't need to use more than one of these terms in the article to explain the same event.
We don't add implications that we drew on our own (see WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH). You say it's implied that his captivity in the jewel was a trap - that is your opinion/what you got from it, but some could argue that it couldn't possibly be a deliberate trap if Chef didn't know the other trolls were in Bridget's hair, or that Bridget was Lady Glittersparkles, and Creek didn't see Poppy until afterwards. Others could edit that that was a film editing error. Therefore, this isn't a point that can be considered "Encyclopedic fact".
There is a WP:MANUAL OF STYLE for article rules, and then we use basic "good english"/"good grammar" rules here so things look professional. For instance, keeping everything the same verb tense. What's more, the article looks unprofessional if we add lots of extra details about only one character in their character description, when other characters just have a brief precis of information.
Edit warring is also a no-no here, which means if you add info and it is removed, you repeatedly re-add it instead of discussing it with other users first to see if there could be a compromise reached (see WP:EDIT WAR).
We sign all talk page posts by putting four tildes, (four of these guys ~ ) which will automatically turn into a signature when saved.

I understand this must be important to you or a favorite part of the film. If you want to go to IMDB and edit the plot summary there, or the fandom wiki for Trolls or some other fansite, that would be the place to add what you are trying to add, though I'd try to correct the grammar a little even then. I hope this helps so you can make good article contributions in the future! :-) EEBuchanan (talk) 19:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC) (Putting this on your talk page as well)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ghent, West Virginia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 911.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Jeanne Robertson

On 25 August 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jeanne Robertson, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 04:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zootopia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Godmother.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lady and the Tramp

FYI: [2], for three months of peace. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:51, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cinderella (1950 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Page boy.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Danny, the Champion of the World (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Precocious.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hope there's no beef over The Incredibles edits

I think we reached a good state with the wording and structure of the plot. Lutesque (talk) 03:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lutesque:No beef on my side! I was just trying to be as clear as I could about why I was changing the article/my arguments in the matter. I hope I didn't cause any offense either. Like you, I was just trying to get the article to as good a state as possible.

EEBuchanan (talk) 03:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About the Puss in Boots note thingy

Hi there, EEEBuchanan!

I was the one who made the edit over the Wolf line, so I want to clearify my thought process there. Yes, you're right, "diablo" does translate to "devil", but the reason why I changed that to "Why the hell" is because I feel like that's the more common equivalent to that phrase in English, specially 'cause the sentence "Por que diablos" is usually said to the same effect/meaning as "Why the hell" in Spanish; plus, I think "Why the devil" is just not that common of a sentence for English speakers (at least to the extent that I know) so I felt like that change was more accurate to the vernacular of everyday English.

Hoped to have clearified the change there and to better inform you whether or not you decide to revert the edit. Anyway, thanks for your attention! TonyZangrand (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyZangrand: OK! I'll leave it alone but if someone else wants to revert it it's fine. Also I'm actually more familiar with "what the devil" than the other option. I was trying to give the literal translation but I can see the idiomatic would be valid too.

EEBuchanan (talk) EEBuchanan (talk) 01:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Adventure of the Engineer's Thumb, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Half crown.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zootopia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asylum.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Watership Down, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Despot.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Danny, the Champion of the World, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Service station.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]