Welcome to my talk page!
Edit warring discussion
First, let me thank you for your efforts in protecting the Planet of the Apes pages. I have started a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring about the WP:3RR violations we've had to deal with at Planet of the Apes (novel). It's at  if you want to comment there. - Gothicfilm (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Some pages seems to attract more edits and edits based on opinions than others. SonOfThornhill (talk) 20:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
That's one way to put it. And now -
- Thanks. Unfortunately, the IP doesn't care about the rules here and has done another revert. SonOfThornhill (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Planet of the Apes (TV series)
Hi - hope you check out my comments on the 'talk' section of the Planet of the Apes (TV series) page under "2 air dates". Best. ~~Abbythecat~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbythecat (talk • contribs) 23:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Reverts at 'List of Planet of the Apes characters'
Just letting you know that an edit you reverted, without saying why, at List of Planet of the Apes characters appears to have been a 'good' edit that removed at least two repeated sentences. In fact they should have cut more, all after "was a human astronaut who ..." is tautology. I have now removed most of the repetitive text in that area.
Your next revert returned sections of text that seem to be an editor's opinions re the character Landon ie. "... an adventurer and a patriot.", and it is also repeated. I saw the first movie recently and don't recall that being said, through it may have been. The 'original' text had some grammar issues but otherwise seemed OK. Also the returned, "... in perhaps hundreds or thousands of dollars ..." in the Rise of the Planet of the Apes section, seems rather subjective.
On further inspection I see that this is somewhat a page 'under construction' as it has several empty sections, few sources and is full of unsourced opinion and speculation. :-\ --220 of Borg 08:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Your revert on Wrath of Khan
I understand your motivation (I think), but the original wording in the article was not the exact line from the film. The original was a paraphrase with excerpts from the line from the film, and the way the IP editor before and now your revert have altered it changes the meaning materially. The line from the film, as pointed out in a recent edit summary, is "He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking." The article, as you have left it, states "Kirk exploits Khan's inexperience in space combat and two-dimensional thinking to critically disable Reliant." The meaning is altered, and ambiguous. To me, it reads as "Kirk exploits Khan's inexperience in space combat and [inexperience in] two-dimensional thinking". If you want the original line, it should be worded to match the original line more closely, not mangled the way it is. Otherwise, it should be made less ambiguous either by rewording, or by explicitly disconnecting the "inexperience with" from "two-dimensional thinking", the way I attempted to do. --Fru1tbat (talk) 10:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
RE: Use of term trekkie in "Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan" entry
To insist that the term "trekkie", when applied to fans of "Star Trek", is common is nonsense; I defy anyone to go to a Star Trek convention and address the attendants as "trekkies" - they will be TOLD to leave, not asked. Even if Wikipedia (and its various iterations) were edited solely by an august group of acknowledged experts (read "authorities"), it is incumbent upon those editors to avoid name-calling (ie -"trekkies", which is denigrating in it diminutive labeling of Star Trek fans, as if they are inferior persons). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
- Bring the subject up on the film's talk page. If a consensus of editors agree with you then the change will be made. That is the proper procedure. SonOfThornhill (talk) 23:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)