Jump to content

User talk:Lugnuts

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 184.58.22.86 (talk) at 11:47, 1 March 2013 (→Talkback: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great Expectations (1974 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Faulkner (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) 11:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 10th Moscow International Film Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Manuel Perez (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) 12:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vauxhall helicopter crash

Hey Lugnuts. I know we don't always see eye to eye, but I just wanted to thank you for the additions you've edited to the Vauxhall article. Wikipedia - the fourth emergency social media service :) doktorb wordsdeeds 09:26, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Matt Chamberlain, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Elisa (singer) and Brendan Lynch (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) 11:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

inre 1906 (film)

Hello, Lugnuts. You have new messages at Talk:1906 (novel)#Merger proposal.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1 gigametre

Since you commented at that AfD, you might be interested in commenting at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1 metre, which is a bundled discussion of many similar articles. The gigametre AfD was closed since it duplicated the larger one. —Torchiest talkedits 22:04, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actresses

You might remember my proposal about 2 years ago to split actors and actress categories, Consensus was strongly against for gender equality or something wasn't it. Can you at least inform User talk:Johnpacklambert than I'm not making it up?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 00:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lugnuts. You have new messages at Dr. Blofeld's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Edits

I looked at your edit history and see that you make an impressive number of edits. That's commendable. However, you might consider using edit summaries, as it is a common practice and helps other editors in improving articles. Secondly, your edit to the Chris Kyle article[1] was in extremely poor taste. Edits like that probably shouldn't happen in the future, even if your intent wasn't to be insulting. Chicken Wing (talk) 10:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed that your Chris Kyle edit was a good faith effort gone wrong, as is Wikipedia policy. Your edit to my talk page reveals it to be a deliberate act of vandalism. I would suggest not engaging in that kind of behavior again. The incivility of this[2] edit was also quite sever and should not be repeated. Chicken Wing (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For your vandalism and repeated acts of incivility, I have reported this incident here.[3] Chicken Wing (talk) 11:05, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Bbb23 (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lugnuts (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'd like an un-involved admin to look at this please. I've been blocked for edits made nearly two years ago and for rudness in an AfD that was dealt with at the time. I haven't been given a chance to reply at the ANI after the admin (eventually) showed up - and then three showed up within minutes to give a virtual backslap to each other. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I see no valid reason for an early unblock. I have also read all the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Lugnuts. I hope the user has done the same, and will then use the short unblock period to examine his/her actions.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:05, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Wikipedian Admins after their mutal backslapping.

Yeeeeeeee-haaaaaaawwwwwww!!!

Editing The Lonedale Operator

Thank you for fixing the extra spaces I introduced into the The Lonedale Operator. I just want to let you know that I will be working on this article throughout the day. Before I finish my edits, I will double check spacing and so forth. I am mentioning this so as not to waste your time by checking each of my edits and doing such fixes until I am finished editing. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and if I have posted this note in the wrong place, please let me know.

Mikolaj Liberacki (talk) 16:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So do you now think actors by era categories are worthwhile?

I noticed that you created Category:20th-century actresses and Category:21st-century actresses. I also noticed that within the last few months you expressed the view that the actors by era categories were useless. So do you now feel it is ok to have such categories? Personally I think they are useful, but I still wonder if we should not follow the example of such categories as Category:19th-century French writers and divide them by nationality.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Argentine films of 1983, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mario Sánchez (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) 00:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jools and George

If you cross Jools Holland with George Lamb you get this guy hehe.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shock Troops (film)

Welcome back. We have a discussion about the use of quotation marks at Talk:Shock_Troops_(film)#.22Presented_by.22_credit. - Fantr (talk) 01:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"[[1978 in film|1978]]"?

I was told some time ago to come here and ask you why we don't write film articles like this anymore: "Ugetsu Monogatari is a [[1953 in film|1953]] period horror film." I don't really mind one way or the other, so I initially just accepted this, but I'm just curious: was there a debate about this somewhere where I can go and read it? I know it's probably covered by WP:OVERLINK, but was it ever common practice to use this link in particular? Cheers! elvenscout742 (talk) 07:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)Hello Elevenscout742. When I began editing here back in '05 the "Year in film" link was commonly added to every film article. You are correct that "Overlink" was one reason we began removing it. Another was WP:EGG. I am not sure where you would find the debate as it took place 5 or 6 years ago and I think that discussions took place in more than one area. If Lugnuts doesn't remember you might try User talk:Erik and/or Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Hello to you as well Lugnuts. I hope that you are well! Cheers to you both. MarnetteD | Talk 19:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Angel Juarbe

Thanks for fixing my mistake (see [4]). Quis separabit? 21:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Films cats

Thanks for the heads up. I'll add 'em back. Pinkadelica♣ 11:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category question

Hey Lugnuts! I was wondering, is the category "21st century actresses" related to when they were acting or to the period of time they lived in? Let's say an actress was born in the 60s and stopped acting in 1999 but is still alive in 2013, would you place her article in the 21st-century actresses category? Lol, Sofffie7 (talk) 13:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

?

Why did you do this without showing a REASON? I added a navbox template on article but you removed it. The movie is starred by Natalia Oreiro, so we can add her navbox. In my opinion you can't remove this contribution without showing a reason. Please, add the tamplate again on article. --Cemallamec (talk) 15:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Argentine films of 1986, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Día que me quieras (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) 11:03, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this as you have recently deleted an interwiki link on a page that is not currently on Wikidata.

Please either make sure ALL links are on Wikidata before removing them OR leave the removal of interwiki links to bots.

·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 15:27, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Age of Innocence (1993 film)

Since you renamed the article, perhaps close discussion? --George Ho (talk) 03:32, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

S/stub tags

When you add a {{stub}} as you did to Gaimdibhla, please use a lower-case s. It saves a few keystrokes for the editor who's going to stub-sort it. Thanks. PamD 21:22, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo? I see you're still adding {{Stub}}. Please add {{stub}}. Thanks. PamD 19:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Miles

Hi Lugnuts,

There are many factual errors in the material on Christopher Miles page and the pages concerning much of his work which I am trying to put right on behalf of Christopher. As far as I am aware all the material I have entered conforms to Wikipedia standards and more importantly is accurate. Why do you keep turning back to previous incorrect versions? MCS 12:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manor Cottage Studios (talk • contribs)

Nomination of I Am the Sun for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Am the Sun 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/I Am the Sun 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 02:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of A Screw for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Screw 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/A Screw 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 04:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of New Mind (EP) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article New Mind (EP) 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/New Mind (EP) 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 04:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Die Tür ist zu for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Die Tür ist zu 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/Die Tür ist zu 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 04:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Various Failures for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Various Failures 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/Various Failures 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 05:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kill the Child for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kill the Child 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/Kill the Child 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 05:21, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Real Love (Swans album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Real Love (Swans album) 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/Real Love (Swans album) 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 05:31, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anonymous Bodies in an Empty Room for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anonymous Bodies in an Empty Room 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/Anonymous Bodies in an Empty Room 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 template from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 05:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Lugnuts. You have new messages at Talk:Disney Vault#Unreliable additions.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lugnuts&oldid=541501922"