User talk:BlueJaeger

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --JYolkowski // talk 20:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removing plot

Hi

Please do not remove "spoliers" from plots. The plot section is a complete record of the plot, or it is a partial plot in need of expansion - if the plot already contains "spoilers" the only reason for thier removal would be if they were fantasy and not in the film. Incorrect spoilers should be corrected, not removed. Please read this: Wikipedia:Spoiler

You should not remove them just because you feel they shouldn't be in there. Chaosdruid (talk) 17:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS - If you are wondering why I am writing this, it is because you appear tohave done this on more than one article: [1], [2], [3].

Hi, thank you for your interest in helping editors. Each of the edits mentioned follows this guideline: "Wikipedia should contain potentially 'spoiling' detail where it substantially enhances the reader's understanding of the work and its impact but be omitted when it merely ruins the experience of the work of fiction for our readers." (Italics mine) Wikipedia:How_to_write_a_plot_summary#Spoilers

Please consider the context in which these edits were made. In the case of Leverage, the info removed was a plot point that did not need to be in the article introduction; moreover, a reader merely interested in a general description of the show would have the first season climax ruined by this unnecessary info. I edited the Lucy Griffiths page for the same reason. The Forces spéciales edit should simply have been summarized as "simplified plot".

Again, thanks for your help. ~ BlueJaeger (talk) 18:11, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do hope that you understand I am not intending to in any way condemn you - after all the Leverage edit was in 2009 and the Griffith edit 2 years ago. I was just making sure that it wasn't habit forming, which I am sure it was not, and to perhaps remind you of them and consider if there was any need for them to still be excluded - in other words were they only really spoilers because they were "current" at the time you removed them and having them in there now would not really be spoiling (as most fans and casual viewers will have seen them).

The Forces Speciale I saw as a little different, as the edits did seem to indeed be removing more than just spoilers.

Plot summaries are indeed a difficult balance, but remember that the recommended word count is far greater than what was there before you shortened it, and it was that which triggered my interest in the reduction. The link you sent is to an essay, rather than a guideline, and so is not something that can be said to be supported by consensus. The MoS guideline says that the plot summary length for a feature film "should be between 400 and 700 words" Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Plot.

Anyway, you have assured me that you are indeed keeping balance in mind and it was nice to communicate with you. Chaosdruid (talk) 05:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of LeechFTP

The article LeechFTP has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

software article of unclear notability, lacking 3rd party references, tagged for notability since 2010

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dialectric (talk) 12:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, BlueJaeger. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, BlueJaeger. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]