User talk:Dbrennan3333

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article The Terminator, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. It is not enough to simply say "Ellison stated...", you need to actually cite a published source for this information, especially since it contains quotations. A further problem is that you are placing this text in front of a citation that does not support it. This implies that the source cited at the end of the text supports the claim, when in fact it doesn't. Please find a reliable source to reference the text you wish to add, otherwise it cannot be included. Additionally, language like "it's worth noting" is editorialization and not appropriate to an encyclopedia. See MOS:OPED for further info. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to The Terminator. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Upon reviewing the source I see that it does verify the Ellison quote. However, it does not verify the claim that "virtually all media accounts of the Harlan Ellison settlement [claimed] that "Demon with a Glass Hand" - the other episode of The Outer Limits scripted by Ellison - was also allegedly plagiarized." The source does not state this at all. In order for this claim to be included you would have to provide a source specifically stating that many media accounts alleged that Demon wtih a Glass Hand was somehow plagiarized by The Terminator. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion on the article talk page regarding your Ellison edit: Talk:The Terminator#Ellison bit. Editing on Wikipedia is done by consensus which means we have to agree to changes to the article so please join the discussion and hopefully we can all come to a staisfactory agreement. Betty Logan (talk) 01:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Terminator. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please see the discussion linked above by Betty Logan and refrain from further reverts until a consensus is reached. --IllaZilla (talk) 01:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this, negative proof is a logical fallacy, so claiming "there is 0 evidence that the media ever did NOT claim.." is a completely invalid argument. "Some" is 100% verified, because there are some sources cited that verify it. I don't know how you can possibly claim that "some" is unverified. Oh look, there go some black dogs... --IllaZilla (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're being discussed by administrators at WP:AN3

Please see WP:AN3#User:Dbrennan3333 reported by User:MikeWazowski (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. If you continue to revert The Terminator you will most likely be blocked from editing. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to The Terminator. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Betty Logan (talk) 01:55, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at The Terminator, you will be blocked from editing without further notice.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: The Terminator was changed by Dbrennan3333 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.88617 on 2011-01-29T05:23:24+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 05:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me one thing I wrote that was inaccurate. Thank YOU! Dbrennan3333 (talk) 05:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at The Terminator

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.

The complete report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:Dbrennan3333 reported by User:MikeWazowski (Result: 31h). EdJohnston (talk) 05:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]