User talk:EatingFudge

Welcome!

Hello, EatingFudge, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Jason Quinn (talk) 02:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Hello, I'm Jason Quinn. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Lanugo without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can 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! Jason Quinn (talk) 02:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jason Quinn
Sorry didnt see a spot to put how ridiculous the idea of hair influencing temperature in a thermal environment is or that the reference merely restated the sentence without a source.
Should I use the Edit summary box for explanations?
Thanks

Hi, EatingFudge. You are correct. The edit summary box is for a quick explanation why you made an edit. I agree with you that the claim does seem rather dubious. If you remove the claim on the lanugo article again with an explanation similar to the one above, I won't object to it. It's possible another editor will since the claim is properly sourced by Wikipedia standards. If another editor objects and re-instates the material, the next proper thing to do would be to discuss it on the article's talk page to try to come to an agreement over whether it should stay or go. Wikipedia's reliability is tied to the accuracy of the sources it uses. In this case, the source may not be an reliable as we'd like. In such situations, dialog and communication may be needed to resolve the issue. A quick read of some of the links I posted above will orientate you to the policies, guidelines, and norms of Wikipedia and help you become an efficient new editor. One quick tip, make sure you sign your comments on talk pages with four tildas like this ~~~~, which will sign and date your comment. I also tried to updating that red message on my talk page to be less confusing, as you reported. Basically it's just trying to say not to jump back-n-forth between talk pages while discussing a single topic. If you have further questions about how to edit, feel free to ask me and I'll do my best to respond sooner or later. Cheers, Jason Quinn (talk) 01:30, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Halston Sage. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:42, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it seems you have not comprehended what my action was. By undoing my change you are promoting inaccuracy. (Is there a Wikipedia policy on inaccuracy?) The initial filmography entry was factually wrong, and I corrected it. I also asked if YouTube videos are considered valid entry for that category. If your contention is that I need to provide an inline citation, please take that up with the larger community as the current standard appears to be that a general reference is suitable for filmography tables. Note: the IMDb general reference does support my change and as I have yet to come across an Actors page that uses inline citation for their filmography I will not do so in this instance just to appease you. Reversion reverted once more. If you would like to comment on my pompous verbosity or my question on suitability, please do. If youtube is not yet appropriate, please delete the entry altogether. Thanks and have a great day. EatingFudge (talk) 03:58, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:RS/IMDB. Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 14:52, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:Citing_IMDb. You will note that this use case is under dispute. I am not trying to subvert the rules, merely work within the bounds of the current situation. Since a decision has not been reached it seems prudent to keep with the current (though evidently contentious) standard. However, since you are adamant that Disputed is akin to Inappropriate I will meet you half way and delete the misinformation instead of fixing it.

Should you wish to re-add it, please WP:PROVEIT.

Edit warring at Carl Benjamin

The burden is on you to gain consensus for changes you wish to make, as explained at WP:BRD. As the quote has already been discussed many times on the talk page, instead of edit warring, you should start a discussion explaining exactly why you think this is an improvement. Grayfell (talk) 19:51, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So what you’re saying is the last 15% of a quote, devoid of all context is considered adequate and anything more is irrelevant. If the consensus is 2+2=5 how does one go about changing this? Well, I suppose I'll give it the old college try. EatingFudge (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

O3000 (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the WP:BLP/Noticeboard regarding WP:NPOV. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Carl Benjamin's rape joke".The discussion is about the topic Carl Benjamin. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Amaroq64 (talk) 09:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of video services edit

I've reverted your edit on Comparison of video hosting services because services added to the list need to be notable, and I didn't find any evidence that the service you added is. TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 02:32, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]