User talk:Ross-Novak

Reposted the bio of actor and producer Domiziano Arcangeli. Revisions made were simply reducing the work of a major filmmaker and actor to a few non truly informative words. While maybe the previous editor may obviously have personal motives against Arcangeli, all the content in the page is true and obviously documented by really legitimate sources and it is of public interest to many readers, including myself! The person whom without any authorization removed Arcangeli's history called some of the content useless, simply injuring dangerously the actor and producer and his work! In fact there's no name dropping nor undocumented material that could be argued. This person has obviously only a personal hate against Domiziano Arcangeli whose mole of work is huge, and, already very much reduced in this version! Most of all calling with such names documented material and public information is truly offensive.

Domiziano Arcangeli

"This fascinating, and, haunting, horrific, disturbing Film, was directed by Italian "extreme" director and artist, Domiziano Cristopharo, who's worked with Arcangeli, on one of the most profane, expressionistic, and, experimental film experiences ever..." or "In fact, Arcangeli has starred, very effectively..." This is called WP:PEACOCK, weasel or puffery. This is an encyclopedia where just the facts are given. Adjectives such as "extreme", "profane", "expressionistic" or "effectively" is matter of opinion and not to be used.

"...has worked with many important international directors, and, notable authors like Giuseppe Patroni-Griffi ... with many more like, Orazio Costa, Aldo Trionfo, Giancarlo Sepe, Rita Tamburi, Hossein Taheri,and, also with the great Lev Dodin." This is an example of name dropping. All the great people he has worked for isn't needed in a sentence. Listing of every co-star isn't needed. List just the important films and then mention the director or a co-start.

Try using paragraphs and periods. Four lines and 12 commas is a run-on sentence.

Wikipedia is a place where everybody contributes. I've had plenty of stuff I've written deleted. Please read Wikipedia:Five pillars. This explains the basic rules of Wikipedia. Bgwhite (talk) 06:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. Bbb23 (talk) 15:22, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I retired any threat to sue, and, i do apologize,i did not know of that rule,or of any proper rules of writing, in any case, there was never truly an intention to sue, it was just a moment of frustration, since English is not an always easy language either, forgive me!

Accept reason:

I am unblocking on the basis of what you say. However, bear in mind that Wikipedia works by collaboration and cooperation, and please don't attack other editors who say or do things that you disagree with, or you are likely to be blocked again. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]