User talk:Ele3ctricBloom$

Welcome!

Hi Ele3ctricBloom$! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Your recent editing history at Under the Boardwalk (2023 film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about 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.

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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Mike Allen 15:37, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Frozen 2, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with above as to List of Walt Disney Animation Studios films. You need to cite sources showing that those studios were owned at that time by WDAS. I'm fairly certain that you won't find any.

You are adding a lot of obviously false and/or irrelevant content to numerous articles, without any supporting sources. Please bring your edits immediately into compliance with Wikipedia:Core content policies. --Coolcaesar (talk) 02:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at List of Walt Disney Animation Studios films, you may be blocked from editing. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again concur with Geraldo Perez. You have been adding large amounts to unsourced and flatly incorrect information to Wikipedia, apparently because you do not understand how the Walt Disney Company is structured or its actual relationships to various internal and external animation studios. If you want to make lasting contributions to Wikipedia articles on Disney animated films, you need to first read up on the history of the various Disney animated studios and the company's notoriously vicious internal politics. All of that is amply documented both online on numerous Web sites and offline in numerous books and articles. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read on that all the time. I

When I edit, it is with good intentions. Ele3ctricBloom$ (talk) 22:17, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of Walt Disney Animation Studios films. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:11, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geraldo Perez Could you specify what is not prpoerly sourced in that article. What I did was clarify the budgets of the movies as they were stated in their respective articles, and I joined cells that repeated themselves. I explained this in my edit. Ele3ctricBloom$ (talk) 01:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You provided no references at all to justify additions to the list. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:49, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There were no references in the section to begin with. Ele3ctricBloom$ (talk) 02:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be more specific, refs for the budgets. Like I said before, clarification can be found in each film's article. Ele3ctricBloom$ (talk) 02:49, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refs showing WDAS involvement are missing, likely as they don't exist. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:Pig City promo.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Pig City promo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 14:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Ele3ctricBloom$ reported by User:Geraldo Perez (Result: ). Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Over The Hedge

Please stop adding your original synthesis to the Over the Hedge article. If you want to make a point about someone not being credited on the film, then you need a source that's actually says that. It is not sufficient for you to decide they were involved (despite the source being a bit vague on the matter) and then determine they weren't credited, and therefore add this fact you have entirely synthesized yourself to Wikipedia. Thanks. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That source is proof that Pacific Data Images worked on the film. I'm not framing it any other way. Ele3ctricBloom$ (talk) 19:53, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the source says is that "a satellite crew operating out of the original Silicon Valley PDI facility pitched in with additional animation, effects and lighting support. ". So it is saying that "crew" worked at the original PDI facility. Were they working for PDI? Were they sub contracted to Dreamworks? Were they Dreamworks staff based at PDI? Was PDI even still based in this facility? I've no idea, but I do know that the source does not say PDI worked on the film.

As to whether PDI were credited on the film or not, that is you combining what you think one source says, with what appears in the film credits, to make a point about something that neither the source or the film says. That's called original synthesis and not permitted on Wikipedia. Plenty of companies were not credited by the film, but by you deciding that it should be mentioned that PDI in particular wasn't, you are voicing an opinion that maybe they should have been. No source does this, so neither should Wikipedia. We have no idea what the arrangement was, and no idea whether crediting the company was appropriate or not. We require a good source to do this for us. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 23:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]