User talk:190.166.83.153

October 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Fly Me to the Moon (manga), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Xexerss (talk) 03:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, stop doing whatever you want. I'm not the only one who objects to your edits. Start a discussion at WT:ANIME to reach a consensus. I find it ironic that you like to bring up the same sockpuppet user in your edit summaries all the time when your edits are almost as disruptive as theirs. Xexerss (talk) 03:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, what the user does about the relevance here is to mess up the topics between the streaming service and the parent company as if they were licensing series that are available within the platform and then releasing it on home video. I have done a little research and the truth is that you do not pay attention to the news coverage on different websites the announcements that Crunchyroll makes that will stream those new series worldwide in future seasons which are coming in many years to come. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 04:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I tell you to first check if the series you are changing the links from the company's article (Crunchyroll LLC) to the streaming service's article (Crunchyroll) have been effectively released on home video by Crunchyroll. You just look at the first few sources that say "streaming" and automatically assume that the company only has the streaming rights and change that in every article. When Crunchyroll releases the series in home video format it clearly states "Licensed by Crunchryoll, LLC"—I have already repeated this multiple times and you continue with the same thing—so I don't think I'm the one "not paying attention" here. One more thing, stop putting the company within an Unbulled list template, that's unnecessary and doesn't affect the parameter. I have no idea why you keep doing that. Xexerss (talk) 04:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are users who edit articles about Crunchyroll anime series that do it the other way around instead of analyzing the information coverage from Anime News Network, IGN, ComicBook or even Crunchyroll itself where it says the opposite that would stream both classic and new series from now before making the change. And it is also necessary to put the Unbulled list template, apart from licensed by, the term "streaming service" in the infobox along the licensors of North America, the United Kingdom and Southeast Asia to accommodate it a bit, you can already know. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you get that it is necessary? The parameter works perfectly without the template. If the territories where the licensee applies is not specified, it is not necessary to place it within the Unbulleted list template. Xexerss (talk) 05:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I looked at some articles that you are just editing, for example, the parameter you mention was working perfectly with or without a template, but it redirects to another template similar to that of Ubl or because it does not appear, I only see the basic usage and all the parameters of the unbulleted list. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 01:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Date template

Please do not add "use dmy dates" to articles that don't use that format. This is the third time you have been asked this, too (twice as 190.80.136.23 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)). Link20XX (talk) 23:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I didn't even realize that I would add the "use dmy dates" template that was originally backwards to the articles that I was editing little by little for automatic updates and I had no idea how the format is used to this template that I just copied and pasted, the thing is that I am responding to the user on the same topic regarding two companies or entities like Crunchyroll that, by the way, left a type of editing summary saying a favorite phrase "The series is not just licensed for streaming" and among others similar phrases. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 00:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about any other edits; all I'm saying is that you shouldn't add the template to articles that don't use that format, like you did at Negative Positive Angler. Please don't do it again. Link20XX (talk) 00:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK 190.166.83.153 (talk) 01:18, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now the other way around; if you see that the article already uses the dmy format, do not change it to mdy as you did at Michiko & Hatchin. Xexerss (talk) 19:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's what the user Link20XX told me not to add "use dmy dates" to the articles, but you already did it, what else do you want? 190.166.83.153 (talk) 22:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, what Link20XX told you is that if the article effectively uses mdy format (check the date format used in the infobox or in the citations of the article) you should add "Use mdy dates"; if the article uses dmy dates—look at the format of the dates in the Michiko & Hatchin article; "Original run: 16 October 2008 – 19 March 2009", not ""Original run: October 16, 2008 – March 19, 2009"—keep the template as is. Link20XX brought up the the issue with the template because you were adding "Use dmy dates" in articles that actually use mdy format. Do you understand now? Xexerss (talk) 03:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Raye and Rachel Weisz. 62.74.24.229 (talk) 06:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I noticed that you recently removed content from Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Please do not delete or alter legitimate talk page comments from other editors. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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.