94.237.76.31

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 94.237.76.31, has made edits to Scream (TV series) that were made in good faith, but have been deemed not to contribute positively to the article. These edits have thus been reverted. Wikipedia's page on unacceptable additions may explain why. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you are confused by this message as it does not appear to relate to you, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:

• Help contents – the main help page.
• Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, our help forum for new users, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask the Help Desk, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! Joeyconnick (talk) 06:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Scream (TV series)

You've made major changes to this and related articles with no prior discussion and in violation of WP:SPLIT; you've not established any consensus for these changes; per WP:BRD and WP:STATUSQUO, take it to Talk:Scream (TV series) and actually discuss the changes you want to make and why you think they are justified. —Joeyconnick (talk) 06:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks (on Aziz Ansari)

Thanks for the correction at Aziz Ansari! Sorry about making the mistake in the first place. — Bilorv (talk) 17:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: No problem! 94.237.76.31 (talk) 17:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Drill it. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Samus Aran have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks.Drill it (talk) 12:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Universal Classic Horror

Hi, i've reverted some of your edits on the Dracula, Invisible Man and Universal Classic Monsters articles. I've done research but there is no serious entry or discussion on what films do, and which films do not belong in the Universal Classic Monsters series and the name seems to only be brought up as part of a home video series. Several new information you've added was sourced but there is no citation to suggest how they are connected in the series, so they were also removed. Before re-adding this information again, I would suggest talking about it on the talk page before adding these films/content to the articles. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:10, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please do not revert back to your edits without discussing it on the talk page. Several of your sources do not state what they claim (see WP:STICKTOSOURCE) or are unsourced (see WP:RS and WP:OR. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not continue to just add information and provide your original research in the edit summary. I've asked if you can provide it in the talk page. So to follow-up on your statements about the "keeping crossovers", the article already states with citations that the films barely have Dracula in it, he does not have much to do with the plot and often appears and disappears in 15 minutes. They aren't "Dracula films, so much as they are Dracula cameoing in Frankenstein stories. Another author points out they shouldn't be included (and that includes the Abbot and Costello film) as Dracula no longer behaves, acts or has any real connection to the original film anymore so they aren't really connected. As for Spanish Dracula, it's mentioned within the article, but it's not really part of the series because it doesn't coincide with the plot. It's just a Spanish-language adaptation of the English film made around the same time. There is no narrative connection so its not really related. Again, these aren't necessarily my points of view, but these are what my research has dug up. If you disagree or have other evidence, please respond to it on the articles talk page. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:47, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia. , again, your adding original research. The cast list you added offers little value (and is unsourced) in the article as the characters don't cross over in the films (with the exception of Van Helsing, but that's so minor it can be discussed in prose). You've also added unsourced dates within the article (1933–1948 doesn't match your edits) and the crediting the screenwriter of Dracula is not really ideal in the infobox as it doesn't really capture the creation process of that film. As for your statement on this not being discussed on the talk page, the inclusion of the Spanish dracula was discussed (Talk:Dracula (Universal film series)) as was the addition of the House of films and your own additions (the latter, being added today, which is me reaching out to you to discuss the film). Please do not make edits without backing them up with sources (or at least discussing them on the talk page) again as they aren't really helping the article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:13, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021

Your recent editing history 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. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Final Space

Thank you for correcting me. wizzito | say hello! 04:15, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

July 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Fear Street Part One: 1994. — YoungForever^(talk) 21:29, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

@YoungForever: I am sorry for the spoiler, but I was not vanadalizing. That information is true, via the leak from Fear Street Part Three: 1666. The actor has a dual role in both of the films. 94.237.76.31 (talk) 23:46, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you are because you are adding pure WP:OR based on WP:SPECULATION. We go by according to credits, not how you want it to be or how you think it should be, per WP:FILMCAST. — YoungForever^(talk) 23:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: Right, but it is not speculation. I have literally seen the film. It is literally her, that actor, as the witch, in certain shots. 94.237.76.31 (talk) 23:53, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

So, what? She isn't even credited as such on Fear Street Part One: 1994. We do not add uncredited cast info without reliable sources as this considered to be WP:OR. — YoungForever^(talk) 23:57, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@YoungForever: I am very confused by your logic here. We both know that she has a dual role, one in an uncredited capacity, but cannot not it without a reference "confirming" it, even if you can see it literally by just seeing the film? Just having seen the film is considered WP:OR? Do I have that right? 94.237.76.31 (talk) 00:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Per WP: FILMCAST, All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name supported by a reliable source. and also When listing uncredited roles, a citation should be provided in accordance with Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Please do not use IMDb as a reference for uncredited roles, as it is considered unreliable for such purposes. What part of uncredited roles need to have reliable sources that you do not understand?

First of all on Fear Street Part One: 1994, Elizabeth Scopel is the actress who played Sarah Fier according to end credits. So, you are clearly adding incorrect information. Elizabeth Scopel may somewhat looked like Kiana Madeira, but they certainly are not the same person. — YoungForever^(talk) 00:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

---