User talk:2603:6000:D400:318D:2923:C68C:E572:CCC9

July 2025

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Internet Archive links from citations. Editors are encouraged to add an archive link as a part of each citation. Please see Wikipedia:Link rot and Help:Using the Wayback Machine for more details.

Thanks! UmbyUmbreon (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Yuri Lowenthal filmography. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. UmbyUmbreon (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

First off, I didn't remove any Internet Archive links from any citations. Secondly, I understand and will do better regarding my behavior, so long as something is done about Waxworker, who is attacking me personally. I believe in an eye for an eye; as so long as he leaves my edit alone, I'll leave his alone. Please make that clear to him. I have provided 100% accurate information and cited three sources to a Wikipedia page that is lacking said information, and a self-important user is removing it over and over again. If it was inaccurate information, would it be so easy for me to provide, not one, not two, but THREE sources for it? Is that not bad? Is your entire community like this? Will condoning people like that not push users away from the website? How am I going to have faith in a website like Wikipedia if the users are aloud to do whatever they want and make the rules up as they go? Is that not a monopoly on public information? I'm going to continue reverting my changes because, again, I am 100% on my information; I wouldn't of added it if I wasn't. I'll stay cool, but keep that user off my post. That's my last word on the matter. 2603:6000:D400:318D:2923:C68C:E572:CCC9 (talk) 10:48, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

A couple of things here:

Firstly, there are 7 edits in your user contributions where archive links were removed from web citations. You personally may not have done this, but someone who shares the same IP address as you definitely did. You may want to consider creating an account if you're on a shared network, so that your edits can be attributed to you.

Secondly, all information added to Wikipedia needs to be verifiable. We do this through the use of references to reliable sources, and it's a policy of Wikipedia that user-generated content is generally not reliable. It's not about the number of sources for a claim, it's about the reliability of those sources. As you've been told twice now, IMDb is not considered reliable because content on the site is user-generated. This has been the general consensus of the Wikipedia community for at least 2019, and any attempts to try and ignore this after being informed about it are not going to be met well. Except under a few limited circumstances, one or two references to a reliable source are generally sufficient.

I strongly recommend not continuing to revert your changes just because you disagree with this. Wikipedia has a policy against edit warring, and reverting an article to your preferred version multiple times is likely to result in a block. Instead, take it to the article's talk page where you can work together with other editors to reach a consensus. If that doesn't work, check out Wikipedia's dispute resolution processes and seek outside help to resolve your conflict. UmbyUmbreon (talk) 13:10, 3 July 2025 (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.

---