Rosvel92

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars: Darth Plagueis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Snoke (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:03, 20 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into Thrawn trilogy. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:49, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello

I'm actually (slowly) writing this page at wikipedia in French... I see Death Star Interceptor has been added here to the Star Wars games list : Star Wars video games... But this game has been adapted without licence, this means this is not a SW game. The developper only obtained a licence from the Fox to use the Williams musics.

I added this to draw attention from an eventual editor [1]. I wrote the french article about this game and compiled all the quality references about it : look here for a google translantion [2] (ps: i'm interrested in c64 review done at the release date, if you find some)...

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archimëa (talk • contribs) 09:16, 23 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

Your recent editing history at Star Wars 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. Railfan23 (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

I have opened a [noticeboard thread] about this. Toa Nidhiki05 21:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars sources and analogues, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hans Gruber (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:30, 28 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars sequel trilogy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Snoke (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

If you're going to make a drastic edit like this, you need to check for broken references (there were three) and update the redirects (which I'm doing now because apparently you can't be bothered). You've been editing a long time but you continue to be very sloppy, please take more care in the future.— TAnthony^Talk 16:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Doogooder (talk) 20:04, 12 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. Doogooder (talk) 14:51, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

  You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. Doogooder (talk) 16:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated the page, List of Star Wars films, as a featured list candidate. As I am not a frequent editor on its page, I have been told to talk to the editors who have worked the most on it. According to the statistics, you have added and edited 24.5% of the page. To join the discussion, click here. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 12:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars sources and analogues, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marvel.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars sequel trilogy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Ringer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Rosvel92: You are a far bigger Star Wars fan than me. Keep up the informative edits ! Back in august you made a large addition to the article, but one of the references was broken, as the reference $multiple actors was invoked but never defined. Did you move or copy this from a different article at the time, and if so, can you find the original full reference there and paste it into this article? Matilda Maniac (talk) 07:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars sources and analogues, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Django.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 7 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars sources and analogues, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bilbo and Lando.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

 

Your recent editing history at Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cultural impact of Star Wars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Ringer.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

  You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Cultural impact of Star Wars. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ——Serial 09:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

FYI, I've taken your edit of Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, as the basis for Draft:Star Wars:Duel of the Fates. I think there might be enough notability in the article, but not enough to include the bulk in the rise of skywalker article, which is the subject of an edit war. Bogger (talk) 10:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, your actions at Works inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien seem very much like what Muboshgu and Bogger and Serial Number 54129 have been saying to you above. I appreciate you like Star Wars, a fine 1977 film at least, but that does not justify large and *extremely* weakly-sourced claims (Original Research, which is forbidden) spread around multiple articles on Wikipedia. Nor does it even begin to justify edit-warring to attempt to force that weak material into those articles. Obviously, sanctions are available for disruptive editing.

Now, to business. I read the material you inserted, and had a go at saving something from it. Basically it fell to pieces in my hands: much wasn't about Tolkien; all of it was very weakly sourced; its tone was essentially Internet gossip, not scholarly analysis (and I've read a lot of that about Tolkien films). The only thing that seemed to be even half-decent is the claim that an early draft contained a Tolkien line, i.e. Lucas *considered* an hommage to Tolkien before dropping it. That falls far short of proving "influence", though (if true, and that's not well attested) it would suggest there might have been some though we don't know what. Not exactly material for a whole section. I do hope this is clear to you.

The link to the section Star Wars sources and analogues#Fictional works similarities and inspirations looked promising, but that article has quite rightly been tagged for 10 years now for needing more citations. The Tolkien section is no exception, it's an embarrassment of weak sourcing combined with absurdly strong claims, and much of the stuff isn't even about Tolkien. Worse, a large part of the argumentation consists of weak comparisons of places and characters, rather than any evidence of actual connection. This isn't how Wikipedia should work. If you want to continue, then please find Reliable Sources such as textbooks and scholarly journal papers that actually support the claims you are making. Very few websites are remotely suitable for the purpose. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cultural impact of Star Wars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matrix.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Wars: Duel of the Fates, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Us.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rey (Star Wars), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hyperdrive.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Festivus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National holiday.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Not sure if the ping worked, since I had to go back and add it correctly, so letting you know I added a comment at Talk:Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker#Massive addition to "Critical response". -- GoneIn60 (talk) 13:50, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Belbury. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Plot hole have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Three thousand words about Star Wars is excessive for a section otherwise listing short examples of plot holes in the history of fiction. Belbury (talk) 14:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Galaxy of Fear, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galaxy of Fear until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Reply