User talk:Doniago

Thanks.

Thanks for reverting the vandal's edit on my talk page. - Eugene Krabs (talk) 04:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts on Taylorville, Illinois

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that the IP editor in this case was removing material that was inappropriate for Wikipedia, from what it sounds like they communicated to me it was a hoax, but in any case a non-notable person in a notable residents section without sources. I've explained to them that they need to use edit summaries in the future. I'm not trying to call you out, I just want you to know what's going on with a situation that you were involved in. Happy editing. --Gimme danger (talk) 06:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info! Doniago (talk) 06:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Misguided newbies

Thanks for this edit. I don't want to be the only one reverting the edits of this guy and his alter ego, so it's nice to have a "second opinion" in support. Perhaps you can drop a polite word on his user talk page to reinforce the message that he's a little misguided? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Not a lot of editors are faster than me on the anti-vand for my own talk page. Thanks! superβεεcat 22:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter

The June 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your intervention on my talk page

It's appreciated. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warn rv

I have reverted this warning template, as it is not considered vandalism. Please AGF to edits like these. Cheers, ZooFari 04:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity, how was that not vandalism? Very confused here. Doniago (talk) 04:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, wrong link: this one. ZooFari 04:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay...maybe I'm more tired than I think I am, but I'm still confused here. Doniago (talk) 04:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I thought that was the BLP itself, sorry! I'm the one that's tired. ZooFari 04:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably be learning something from this experience. :) Anyway, I'm heading off for the night. We can talk about this more, or not. Doniago (talk) 05:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

G'night, I need to lay-off the wiki too :-) ZooFari 05:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

?

Is there anyway that you could remove the messages to my Talk page? I reported that they were mistakes and explained to Bot, but I haven't heard back. Thank you Snackshack100 (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Doniago (talk) 20:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You so much!!! Snackshack100 (talk) 14:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of PROD from Human knot

Hello Doniago, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Human knot has been removed. It was removed by ThaddeusB with the following edit summary '(contest prod - subject is a notable activity and the article's problems can be solved through editing - remove "how to" and other unencyclopedic information, format reference)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with ThaddeusB before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter

The July 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the housekeeping. Regards Tiderolls 03:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong Disneyland

I saw you issued a Level 4 warning on an IP I've been dealing with regarding articles relating to Hong Kong Disneyland. I looked at this most recent change, and it appears that the park's ambassador is indeed Jacky Cheung. Please see this source, which verifies that Mr. Cheung, not Mr. Chan, is (or at least was) the park's ambassador. Based on how this IP is editing, I have a feeling they'll trigger another warning soon. All that said, thank you for keeping an eye on the article, and this particular IP. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, sorry if I jumped the gun. Doniago (talk) 03:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'm not sure why I double-checked this one. I think it was that maybe it was Jackie Chan, and that "Cheung" may have been "Chan" in a different dialect (I don't speak Chinese, so no clue if this is even possible). This IP does bear watching ... seems to be doing fan-boy edits. I started following the IP when they started saying that a new attraction announced for the park, "Mystic Manor," is going to be HK Disneyland's Haunted Mansion. While probably true, there's nothing verifiable to say that, so until someone says otherwise, "Mystic Manor" is a new type of attraction making its debut at HK Disneyland. No worries, and thanks again. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maniac (album)

FYI, you removed the hangon tag when you restored the DB tag. Something to watch for when using Huggle. 98.248.32.178 (talk) 03:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the history

You've issued a 3rr warning recently I think that makes 5 in 2 days for the one user. I haave an admin to intervene.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. I was about to report them myself after seeing yet another edit to the Star Trek film page. Doniago (talk) 13:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moon "Men"

Thank you for reverting the astronaut page vandalism. This person has continued to do this over a number of months to the pages of the 24 astronauts who flew to the moon. A discussion has begun on WT:SPACE if you wished to look, and perhaps assist. I second the idea of protecting the pages for a while. Edgeshappy12 (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work.

Checking whether a warning is warranted before issuing one to a newbie (which I'm not, by the way) might be a better policy in the future than reverting it after the fact. Not only would that be friendlier to new users, you'll also avoid looking like a warn-happy douchebag! 59.42.151.22 (talk) 04:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redshirt Cultural Impact

I'm all for removing that section (as irrelevant trivia) but it was sourced... Lots42 (talk) 05:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please take the discussion about keeping or removing this section to Talk:Redshirt_(character) Samboy (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mamma Mia! film

Hi Doniago. I see that you have removed an edit that I made to this article, as "unsourced." The edit concerned the production of Mamma Mia. I stated that part of the beginning was filmed at Lloyds in London and you removed this information. I wonder why? Firstly, it is self-evident, if you look at the film, that the building is Lloyds. Secondly, I am a City of London Guide, and I was passing that building with a tour group during the very filming of the sequence. Actually, I would have thought that the second bit of information, which is anecdotal, obviously, is not needed, because the building is CLEARLY Lloyds of Lime Street. The information therefore does not require "sourcing." I have replaced my information and would ask you to leave it intact. I am a well-motivated contributor to Wikipedia. If you need to reply, please take it to my Talk page. FClef (talk) 01:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest reviewing WP:RS and WP:VERIFY. Something being "self-evident" is insufficient grounds for inclusion. Your background similarly is insufficient. I could just as easily claim the same credentials, could I not? It doesn't matter how "clear" something is, people here have the right to ask for a 3rd party citation, and if you can't provide one, the information can be considered inappropriate for inclusion. Doniago (talk) 02:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blanked page

Sorry about the blanked page, I forgot to put the redirect again and thanks for mending it! -- CaTi0604 (talk) 18:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Doniago (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scream (film)

At last! A sensible pair of eyes looking over this. I tried to maintain it a couple of years ago, but gave up. It's just an attraction for trivia and people wanting to write in detail about the plot. The JPS^{talk to me} 20:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hee, you called me sensible. :) But seriously, thank you! I think trimming plot bloat is becoming one of my specialties for better or worse...though really, it should be far shorter even than it currently is. Doniago (talk) 00:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, well, if you're so good at it, you can help me out at Jekyll (TV series), of you want ;) Ironically, half of the article is very good... The JPS^{talk to me} 09:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ta :) The JPS^{talk to me} 22:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did what I could for it without making some serious cuts...which are probably warranted, but I try to leave that to more experienced (or bold, I suppose) editors. Doniago (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Player Piano

Re: revision 310967083 by 82.24.210.54 (talk) rm unsourced--there was no quotes, no speculation, it was centred around a link to another wiki page, that is not unsourced and you purported reason for removing it was entirely unfounded.82.24.210.54 (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel my edits aren't justified, you're welcome to undo them. Since it's not as though I've removed the material more than once, I don't know why you didn't just do that instead of messaging me. Doniago (talk) 03:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter

The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Black Cauldron

Hey there ... can you take a look at the article for The Black Cauldron (film), when you get a moment? It looks like a Bambifan sock got into the article and added a bunch of stuff. I tried to trim it back but this new IP says that what I did was vandalism. Honestly, I'm not sure what the status quo on that article should be at this point. Thanks. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why the user who reverted your edits assumed vandalism, especially given that nothing you removed was sourced, but I've reverted their reversion with a note explaining that you were removing unsourced content, not vandalizing. Doniago (talk) 19:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILM September Election Voting

The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert!

Hi Doniago. Thanks for removing that rather unhinged (and ungrammatical) utterance from my talk page. Cheers, Favonian (talk) 07:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I was actually watching your Talk page already because of the Vlad Tepes stuff. Frankly none of the sources that RabbitHeart(?) added struck me as particularly reliable, but hopefully if they intend for their edits to be taken seriously they'll follow your advice and use the Talk page. Doniago (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agricite

I was wondering when somebody'd do something. I'd rather do a reword myself. I just can't quite think of the right way to word it. In the TV show they'd use phrases like "hard as agricite", but I'm not sure how to express that in sentence form. Basically this usage is kinda like "hard as a rock", but different.--Marhawkman (talk) 22:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've never seen the show, I just saw horrifying grammar. :) I'm not sure whether that usage is notable enough to merit inclusion, but if you feel it should be there, perhaps something like, "Often used as a basis of comparison (i.e. "hard as agricite")." BTW, next time a link would be helpful, I had to do a search on Agricite to find out WTH we were discussing. :) Doniago (talk) 23:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Box office totals

I thought I did change the access dates, sorry. That said, you should not (and cannot) simply revert the changes. If the dates aren't updated, then check the links to make sure everything's right and update them yourself. Either that or leave them as they are and contact me and I will fix it. But completely reverting valid information (and thus making the info out-of-date and incorrect) is not a proper action, so please don't do that again. I have been updating the box office numbers for Star Trek for many months now, there is no need to revert them just because I forgot to change some access dates, nor are you supposed to. Unless there's some Wikipedia policy I don't know of that permits laziness and pointless reverts. Anyway, from now on, if i forget something in an edit, just let me know and I'll fix it. Don't go reverting valid changes. Thanks in advance. --ThylekShran (talk) 23:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I didn't revert your edit, I -undid- your edit, and said why I was undoing it in my edit summary. Doniago (talk) 02:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Re this edit with this: "Reverted addition of dubious unsourced content" rationale.
You did the right thing, but for the wrong reason.
The annon is completely correct - the table is rubbish. However, the place for the annon to argue about it is at the table's page, not on the article page. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter

The September 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

P