User talk:Benatfleshofthestars

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Benatfleshofthestars, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Gary King (talk) 20:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems: Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal)[edit]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal), please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.tv.com/boston-legal/guantanamo-by-the-bay/episode/1026569/summary.html. As a copyright violation, Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal) appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal) has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. • Gene93k (talk) 04:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spaces and Boston Legal episodes[edit]

Hi. Please put a space before the left parenthesis in the titles of your Boston Legal episode articles. It's getting to be a drag moving all your articles! Example: 

Tea and Sympathy (Boston Legal)

not 

Tea and Sympathy(Boston Legal)

Thanks! —Largo Plazo (talk) 05:41, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure no problem, thanks. (Benatfleshofthestars (talk) 12:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Speedy deletion of Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement [of http://www.tv.com/boston-legal/guantanamo-by-the-bay/episode/1026569/summary.html]. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. • Gene93k (talk) 09:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement[edit]

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Guantanamo by the Bay (Boston Legal). For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. • Gene93k (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Duck and Cover (Boston Legal)[edit]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Duck and Cover (Boston Legal), please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.tv.com/boston-legal/duck-and-cover/episode/1026570/summary.html. As a copyright violation, Duck and Cover (Boston Legal) appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Duck and Cover (Boston Legal) has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. • Gene93k (talk) 09:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Trial of the Century (Boston Legal)[edit]

The Trial of the Century (Boston Legal) has been marked for speedy deletion as copyright infringement from

http://www.tv.com/boston-legal/trial-of-the-century/episode/1030869/summary.html. • Gene93k (talk) 10:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zack and Miri Make a Porno[edit]

Hi. Thanks for adding the Rotten Tomatoes info to the article. In the future, however, please make sure to cite the source in the text more explicitly (in this case, a link to the RT page). Not doing this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. Another editor deleted the material because you didn't do this, but I went to RT and added the link myself, and restored the material. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 04:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009[edit]

Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any other tests that you may do and take a look at the welcome page, if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. BOVINEBOY2008 13:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009[edit]

I thought I would reply and explain how things work. Other than the big PPV's (WrestleMania and Bound for Glory), we don't create articles for PPV's until about 2 months before the event. That means no article for Breaking Point should exist yet. When it does come time for an article, it will be at "WWE Breaking Point", not "Breaking Point (2009)" (since there has not been any other WWE event called Breaking Point). TJ Spyke 03:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks, I only named it 2009 because it will carry on Uforgiven's lineage and also because all the other pay per views have been changed by year. Also, I would hope users to consider creating the page again, as it gives people information on the upcoming PPV. I wanted to know about it, and thus researched and thought it could be shared with others. Where's the harm? I hope you and other users will think about it. Thanks

Please remember to sign your posts. The event will get an article eventually, probably in mid to late July. The basic reason is that the article would have no information other than the location. Right now the Unforgiven article contains the same information that would be in the Breaking Point article. TJ Spyke 03:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Survivor Series[edit]

It doesn't make any sense. The match can be added to the article provided that has been formalized at the official website. Those are the rules. Archibald Leitch (talk) 13:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010[edit]

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Royal Rumble (2010). Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. See the article talkpage. TJ Spyke 01:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Genesis (2010). Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. TJ Spyke 01:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few things. First, when linking to the British newspaper, write [[The Sun (newspaper)|The Sun]] ([[The Sun]]</nowiki]] redirects to <nowiki>[[Sun]]. The Sun also goes in the Work field, not the Publisher slot. Finally, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Style guide#Manual of Style (MoS) for how PPV articles should be formatted. TJ Spyke 18:01, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rotten Tomatoes[edit]

Please follow the sentences' wording for Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic at WP:RTMC. The rating systems need to be explained accurately. Thanks! Erik (talk | contribs) 13:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the above essay for wording of Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. Erik (talk | contribs) 00:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay will do although I must argue that the "official wording" is inaccurate as the % is not so much a score, but rather a percentage of positive reviews. Score implies an individual or group simply awarded the number whereas Rotten Tomatoes actually reports the percentage, its an aggregate.

I reverted you on Priest (2011 film). Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a score based on its own determinations; it doesn't happen to have the percentage that it shares with everyone. Erik (talk | contribs) 11:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hostages (TV series) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • premise and handsome production values, but its twisty plot sometimes strains credulity.'<ref>[[cite web |url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/hostages/ | title=Hostages: Season 1 Reviews |
  • tv/hostages/ | title=Hostages: Season 1 Reviews | publisher=Flixster | accessdate=December 10, 2013}}</ref> David Hinckley of the ''New York Daily News'' gave the show 4 out of 5 stars.<ref>{{cite web

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Benatfleshofthestars. 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]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Benatfleshofthestars&oldid=1088708278"