User talk:109.79.161.25

Small comment(s)[edit]

When adding citations, use a template that includes dates, authors, and access-dates, such as <ref>{{cite web|url=|title=|date=|first=|last=|website=|access-date=}}</ref>. Also remember to always look for and replace WP:CURLY apostrophes with normal ones. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Use "Cite Rotten Tomatoes" and "Cite Metacritic" when citing those scores. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike your edit to Gunpowder Milkshake, films and websites should be italicized. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:17, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Avoid linebreaks when adding citations. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Why do you believe site specific templates are a good thing? (It used to be that Wikipedia refused to even offer {{cite magazine}} and forced us to use {{cite journal}}. I think it is a terrible idea to have site specific templates, yet another thing making the learning curve even steeper for ordinary editors.) Why do you believe site specific templates should be so strongly recommended that you would go out of your way to tell an IP editor to use them when the article was already using them? There are various details that I do not believe are important or necessary but I'm not going to stop you from using them if you want to make the extra effort and do it I wont revert those changes, even if I think they're a waste of time. The specific templates were there already so I kept them, it isn't even clear why you are asking me to use them. I'm not new at this, I hope you aren't copy pasting boilerplate warnings at people. If you aren't taking the time to write an appropriate message you shouldn't expect me to take it seriously. If you want to convince me that I should be doing things that way I'll need to see a really strong and large consensus and facts to support the idea that these formatting details are actually important. You're going to need to point to relevant guidelines.

I'm using the editing and citation tools built into Wikipedia (Edit toolbar, Cite, Templates, Cite web) it isn't my fault that the built in tools don't filter out the non-standard quote marks. If I'm editing the same article for a while I will sometimes go through articles and clear out MOS:CURLY but it is not a priority when articles are just getting started. I cannot take minor formatting details seriously but I will make a special effort to follow MOS:ACCESS policies if I'm made aware of them.

No one else had bothered to add reviews yet. Content is far more important than formatting. I added reviews from a notable critic and two of the industry trade papers. Not difficult to do but no one else had done it. (If I was editing a Featured article I'd make more effort to match the existing formatting but this is a new article.) Whatever I write is highly likely to be rewritten ten different ways no matter what I do, I don't think it is reasonable of you to expect me to follow all the minor formatting rules. Your orders seem more than a little aggressive. If you want me to do things your way you're going to have to make more effort to be nice about it and also to explain better with more references to the guidelines and policies. -- 109.79.161.25 (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The comment about templates, and the rest as well, were about your previous edits (not just about the addition of reviews to Gunpowder Milkshake). You began editing on July 15, and while it is encouraged to assume new editors have read all the rules, you say that you're "not new at this", so I have to ask, do you have another account? Either way, I was just trying to give you some links to the manual of style, so sorry if I sounded aggressive. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added content backed by reliable sources, formatted using citation templates, and you still decided to complain about my edits. WP:GOODFAITH. Boilerplate welcome messages are tedious but they're better than the above dump of minor criticisms.

I don't know where got the idea "it is encouraged to assume new editors have read all the rules". That's a big assumption, it is difficult enough for experienced editors to know the many and sometimes contradictory rules, that continue to change, nevermind expecting new users to know even the simple rules. If you really believed I was a new user it would have been incredibly unconstructive to burden them a negative first post with the minutiae you asked me to look at, and I was not impressed by it either. I will make some effort to follow the established formatting style of an article but I will not prioritize style over content. It is not reasonable to expect new editors to know or care about or even understand a detail as minor as MOS:CURLY, especially when the built-in tools Wikipedia are too dumb to filter them out. I think you are seriously mistaken telling anyone to use site specific templates, they exist but I've seen no evidence yet to support the suggestion that they are preferred and you're the first editor I've seen actively recommended them. Use them if you want, format things strictly if you want but it is not reasonable to expect other editors to care as much as you seem to about minor formatting details.

"so I have to ask, do you have another account?" you don't have to ask, there's no need to make a passive aggressive accusation like that either. I deliberately choose to edit anonymously as Wikipedia allows me to do. I've no interest in fakenames or collecting barnstars. Usually it means editors focus instead on improving the article and instead stick to making comments relevant to the article on the article talk page. If you sincerely want to encourage new editors to follow minor rules it might be a good idea to start with a positive comment or maybe direct them to Wikipedia:Teahouse. -- 109.79.75.58 (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WALLOFTEXT. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 21:50, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is hypocritical of User:Some Dude From North Carolina to expect others to make the extra effort to follow minor rules and guidelines and then to turn around about complain about WP:WALLOFTEXT. Don't claim no one ever told you your behavior is off-putting and unhelpful. I think we're done here. -- 109.79.75.58 (talk) 23:24, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I used a bot to give you those messages... Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.