User talk:Captain Impulse

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Captain Impulse! Thank you for your contributions. I am Checkingfax and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:26, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice on reverts[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Cloverfield. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 06:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cloverfield[edit]

This issue with Cloverfield is that at its incarnation, there were a lot of junk sites being added at the start with rumors. A drive was done to revise the article so only reliable sources were used and to avoid unverifiable content when possible. As for how to operate the official site (flipping the photographs), you have to remember that this is supposed to be an encyclopedic article. To describe how to navigate a website isn't very encyclopedic, especially considering the likelihood that the content will change tremendously later. That's why there's a citation to describe the site itself instead of personal observations -- if the site is updated, then down the road, nobody can verify if the personal observation was accurate or not. We try to back up every bit of information in this article with references that fall under the reliable source criteria -- information written by published, third-party sources, basically. Does that make sense, in regard to what content is placed in the article or not? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia[edit]

Hi. I just read your thoughts on trivia and I was wondering if you would be interested in this.

Here is a wikiproject proposal for trivia and a fresh look at trivia policy by the admins. Support the wikiproject proposal. Add your name to the list here: [wiki project proposal for wikitrivia]

Please send this link to other users that you feel would be interested. Thanks Ozmaweezer 18:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]