User talk:Joseph1357

Welcome!

Hello, Joseph1357, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 02:54, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Singularity42 (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please read the essay at WP:Bold, revert, discuss. Singularity42 (talk) 19:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your comment in this edit summary, please note that Wikipedia does not operate on any given editor's say-so. Instead, it is based on what the reliable sources say. Instead of reverting back to a preferred version, find sources that support why you think the current consensus is wrong, and try to get a new consensus on the article's talk page. I can assist you in trying to do this, but not while you are edit-warring. Singularity42 (talk) 19:36, 25 September 2013 (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:Joseph1357 reported by User:Singularity42 (Result: ). Thank you. Singularity42 (talk) 19:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Animation is NOT a genre; It's a medium

There have been a lot of people who say that animation is a medium, but Wikipedia here puts in as a genre of film, but animation is not a genre; Hollywood just treats it like that. That's why I've been taking out of film and TV genres categories or pages because it's NOT a genre. There are plenty of people I know who hate seeing animation being called a genre (Brad Bird is a good example). So, please, understand why I keep making these changes.

Sincerely Yours, Joseph1357 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph1357 (talk • contribs)

Here's some proof: Animation Historian Jerry Beck said "It's an art form. But Hollywood treats it as a genre". Also, TV Tropes lists animation as a medium. BTW, it's Brad Bird, not Brad Pitt. Besides, you know what's a genre? Fantasy and comedy. Those ARE genres that animation, film and comics can do very well. Why? Because they're mediums; art forms, if you will.

Hi, I'm an administrator here. Please discuss your concerns on talk pages instead of continually reverting, or you may be blocked from editing in the future. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 20:14, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit on the Sylvester the Cat article

I see that you changed the edit I made on Sylvester (Looney Tunes). Do you have any proof that Bob Clampett stole ideas from others? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirbyluvstoast (talk • contribs) 11:42, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Though Clampett's contribution to the Warner Brothers animation legacy was considerable and inarguable, he has been criticized by his peers as 'a shameless self-promoter who provoked the wrath of his former Warner's colleagues in later years, for allegedly claiming credit [That's what I meant to say, BTW] for ideas which were not his'" -From the Bob Clampett article here on Wikipedia. Example: I heard he once he claimed creation for Sniffles the Mouse, a character Chuck Jones created. (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2qnt1_naughty-but-mice-commentary_shortfilms).

May 2014

Hello, I'm Figureskatingfan. I noticed that you recently removed some content from History of Sesame Street without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:40, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Futurama#Original run

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Futurama#Original run. Thanks. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:27, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Joseph1357. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. This is about your assertion that EQG is not part of the MLP FiM franchise. ViperSnake151 Talk 03:08, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 01:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Golden Age of American animation. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dpm12 (talk) 12:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Joseph1357. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]