User talk:TheTouchdownMaker

TheTouchdownMaker, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi TheTouchdownMaker! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Hello. It's fine to add sources and other information from sources others have added. What's not ok at all is to delete something someone has added from a verifiable source. So, even though you added correct content, you also deleted other correct content. When something is presented on Wikipedia that is controversial and of opinion, it's important for Wikipedia to provide both sides of the argument per Wikipedia guidelines, no matter what our subjective perspective may be. Also, there's a lot more to citing sources than simply adding the URL. It took me a while to learn and others helped me. I'm filling out your references. Take a look to get a better idea, so you can do it yourself in the future. If you need any help with it don't hesitate to ask me. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 23:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Every section on the page is being trimmed because three editors, including an administrator strongly and passionately argued for it. I disagreed but their side prevailed. A separate editor added the tag about the page containing excessive detail. I removed the quote about Shannon being annoyed with Tarantino not contacting her because it's more about her frustration over the situation, rather than the actual portrayal of Bruce Lee. I believe it not only detracted from the section but also her perspective and argument over his actual portayal was already represented. As far as other quotes being cut down, I did not edit those, other than I removed a Quentin from Quentin Tarantino and put Tarantino in brackets to avoid excessive words. I trimmed away from the quotes but if you look at that, it says the exact same thing. Another editor trimmed the other quotes and where I don't see how he changed the context of what was being said, perhaps you disagree. If so, how? Like where he cut out that Mike Moh believes Lee was better than the stuntman so that's why he didn't respect them, how is that needed? It seems exactly like the kind of excess we should look to trim. The important part is that he didn't respect the stuntmen. Not why Moh believes he did. How do you feel differently? Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 16:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When I say I trimmed away from the quotes, I'm saying I trimmed parts that were not quotes. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 16:48, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a side of the argument. I think Lee was portrayed unfairly and in a racist way even though at times he was cocky and hard on stuntmen. If that's a side, that's mine. However, you are mostly adding back material that was removed by another editor. Not me and it sounds like you need to address this on the talk page. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Your recent editing history at Once Upon a Time in Hollywood shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ST47 (talk) 03:37, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for edit warring, as you did at Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ST47 (talk) 04:08, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]