User talk:Jimmypopeyedoyle

June 2013[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits to Star Trek Into Darkness 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: Star Trek Into Darkness was changed by Jimmypopeyedoyle (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.893979 on 2013-06-02T23:17:29+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Fortune Cookie may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

expressing his surprise that Boom Boom, instead of the other players, would engage in a brawl). As Harry leaves to look for Boom Boom, the coach guesses a jersey to be an even number, only for

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:20, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Superman (film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

of the [[Superman|same name]] and stars [[Christopher Reeve]], [[Margot Kidder]], [Marlon Brando]], [[Gene Hackman]], [[Glenn Ford]], [[Phyllis Thaxter]], [[Jackie Cooper]], [[Marc McClure]], [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:26, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Martin451 (talk) 02:00, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future). Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Valenciano (talk) 19:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the character is significant enough to have a page of her own. Besides, she used to have one of her own anyway. After all, she does come out in all three of the Back to the Future films as well as the animated series and video games. Also, the fact that she has been portrayed by an Oscar-nominated actress is another reason to create a page for the character. Thanks for reading. - Jimmypopeyedoyle

Jimmypopeyedoyle, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi Jimmypopeyedoyle! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Valenciano (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Wikipedia is not the place for extended script content and dialog; in addition to going against Wikipedia style guidelines for films, there are also copyright concerns from directly quoting that much content. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Fortune Cookie[edit]

Hello, I'm Levdr1lp. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to The Fortune Cookie because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The plot section is meant to briefly summarize the film's narrative, not list its every scene and detail. Levdr1lp / talk 04:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Jimmypopeyedoyle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Betty Logan (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adding original research to plot summaries on film articles[edit]

Jimmy, will please stop with this type of edit on the film articles. Plot and character summaries are supposed to be a brief summary of what occurs in the film (see WP:PLOTSUM and WP:FILMPLOT) and should only relay what occurs or is strongly implied. You are going way beyond this and adding tons of speculation and your own analysis. Even though I happen to agree with much of your interpretation is not confirmed or denied by the film, and that constitutes WP:Original research on Wikipedia which is prohibited. I have summarised my stance in more detail at Talk:Superman (film)#Lois Lane original research, so please gain a WP:Consensus for your changes before restoring them again, otherwise I am going to have to request some form of intervention. It might be a good idea to read MOS:FILM since you seem to have received quite a few warnings from other editors. Betty Logan (talk) 13:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plot sections[edit]

Please stop adding unnecessary details to plot sections, as you did at both The Departed and As Good as It Gets. These expansions are unnecessary and unhelpful. Please read WP:FILMPLOT before making any more such edits. Thank you. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 12:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Ironweed (film)[edit]

Do not change last names to first names in film plots. Plot sections across WP consistently use last names, and you have offered no reason that this should be changed. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 15:42, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Shutter Island (film)[edit]

You have been asked repeatedly not to change last names to first names in plot summaries. You have also been reverted numerous times when you added actor's names and other unnecessary links to plots. Please stop these sorts of edits, or use article talk pages to explain why you have made these edits. Thank you. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 22:35, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of awards and nominations received by Clint Eastwood, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 01:53, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Jennifer Lawrence, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 22:07, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Jennifer Lawrence, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Elizium23 (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True Romance[edit]

What in the hell are you trying to prove by engaging in editing in the way you do? You are reverted multiples times, and yet you persist in making the exact same kind of edits, over and over again. As you rarely use edit summaries or post on article talkpages, I am simply left to wonder what it is you think you are doing. What you are not doing is being helpful, so please explain what it is you are up to. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 00:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dave (film). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
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 ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 00:11, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Sweet and Lowdown. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 14:38, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Rushmore (film), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 04:14, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited O Brother, Where Art Thou?, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ray McKinnon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jarrod Spector[edit]

The article Jarrod Spector has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Tassedethe (talk) 20:33, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now sourced. Just needs more. — Wylie pedia 08:58, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Milk (film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

1978 announcement to the press that [[Harvey Milk]] ([[Sean Penn]]) and Mayor [[George Moscone]] ([[Victor Garber]] [[Moscone–Milk assassinations|had been assassinated]]. Milk is seen recording his

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014[edit]

Your recent editing history at List of Fargo episodes shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

When you've been reverted three times, you stop reverting, you don't continue to revert and add MORE of the same edit. You have now reverted four times and are subject to blocking. We use last names in the Fargo episode summaries for clarity. If you feel that should be changed, DISCUSS on the talk page. And use edit summaries, as you've been asked to do over, and over again. --Drmargi (talk) 02:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More of the same[edit]

Any changes from last names to first names on Fargo and its episode articles should be discussed. Please stop making changes and participate in the discussion. --Drmargi (talk) 00:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ER Season 1[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
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 ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Your edits have been reverted, and yet you persist in continuing to change last names to first names. Once you are reverted, you stop and discuss. Your edits are now becoming disruptive! Please stop and discuss on the article talk page. --Drmargi (talk) 19:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Robert Downey, Jr. filmography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

[[MTV Movie Award for Best Hero]]<br />Nominated—MTV Movie Award for Best Onscreen Duo <small>(with [[Mark Ruffalo]]</small><br />Nominated—[[Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards|Nickelodeon Kids'

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:50, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Garden State (film)[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to make disruptive edits, as you did when removed sourced content and replaced it with unsourced material without any rationale or edit summary with this edit to Garden State (film), you risk being blocked from editing. Please do not make that necessary. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 17:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015[edit]

Please refrain from making changes to plot summaries/synopses that conflict with the plot summary edit guides, as you did at Magnolia (film) . You may wish to review the specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. Excessive detail and high word counts should be avoided. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- DonIago (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Bourne Identity (2002 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brian Cox. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paper Marriage (Taxi) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paper Marriage (Taxi) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paper Marriage (Taxi) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Fuddle (talk) 03:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Jimmypopeyedoyle. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Jimmypopeyedoyle. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Jimmypopeyedoyle. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]