User talk:TroySchulz

November 2015

Hello, I'm Non-dropframe. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Pray for Death— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Non-Dropframe _talk 16:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. SummerPhD^v2.0 23:35, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Battlefield Earth (film), you may be blocked from editing. Again, please be more selective in your use of the "minor" edit check box. In addition to being at odds with IMDb, your edit was clearly not "minor". SummerPhD^v2.0 01:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent changes to credits

Please stop changing film credits in the infobox. I'm going to assume in good faith that you're trying to make corrections but getting the details wrong. In the future, please cite a reliable source if change the credits. If you continue changing credits and putting in wrong values, however, I'm going to assume that it's intentional vandalism. You could get blocked from editing if you continue like this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:36, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm Doniago. I wanted to let you know that I undid your recent edits to the Die Hard plot summary because they added a significant amount of unneeded detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Adding cast names to the plot is frequently unnecessary as that information already appears in its own section. Thank you. -- DonIago (talk) 16:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Olympus Has Fallen, you may be blocked from editing. BattleshipMan (talk) 23:46, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at We Were Soldiers, you may be blocked from editing. David J Johnson (talk) 11:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further notice the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to We Were Soldiers. Jim1138 (talk) 22:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at We Were Soldiers, you may be blocked from editing. David J Johnson (talk) 20:03, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Please do not add your own interpretation of a film's reception. This is original research. We have review aggregators, such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, to do this for us. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:12, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actor names in plot summaries

Please stop adding actor names to plot summaries when they are already listed in the cast section. There is consensus at WikiProject Film to remove them when they are redundant. If you disagree with this, then start up discussion there, please. Or, at the very least, discuss your changes on the article's talk page when they are contentious. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers

added a link pointing to Alan Howarth

Turkey Shoot (1982 film)

added a link pointing to Thriller

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Holes (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Kelly. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:58, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 21 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Hellraiser page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing sourced data and removing reliable sources

Hello. Please do not change sourced text, as you did at Hellraiser (film), and replace it with unsourced data. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Keep (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alex Thomson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ken Nolan

Hello, TroySchulz. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Ken Nolan, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Ken Nolan to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, Dane2007 (talk) 18:55, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Howarth. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at We Were Soldiers. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been undone.

You have been warned numerous times before regarding your editing on this page.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 07:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing disruption

I've asked you to stop doing this before. I am asking once again. Please stop adding actors' names to plot summaries when they are already listed above the plot in the lead, beside the plot in the infobox, and below the plot in the cast list. Second, please stop adding unsourced content. In this edit, you add an unsourced country to Hellraiser. In this edit you add unsourced people as uncredited co-writers. In this edit, you add an unsourced country to Death Machine. This is getting very disruptive. If you continue doing this, you're going to get blocked from editing Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the third diff, an edit to Death Machine, I should have paid more attention; Japan is listed in one of the sources as a country of production. I apologize for saying that was unsourced. However, the vast majority of that diff is still unsourced. The assertions that Death Machine received mixed reviews, that it's a "minor cult hit", that certain aspects were praised by critics, that certain character names are references to other films – all of these things need to be cited to a reliable source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harald Kloser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stonewall (film). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:16, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terror Train, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slasher. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Dracula 2000. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. It is difficult for me to assume you are making these edits in good-faith when you have been warned about this behavior previously. DonIago (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Halloween H20: 20 Years Later, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Williamson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Black Sabbath (film). - Mlpearc (open channel) 00:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Christopher Rydell

The article Christopher Rydell has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no reliable references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 21:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Man, your page reads like a recidivist's crime sheet. Let' me just warn you, again, Your edit to Cristina Marsillach was reverted for a reason, and you are not to restore that she is a singer without showing some proof or obtaining consensus on the talkpage of that article. Your last warning for the addition of unsourced material is only a week old, so if you repeat that mistake, you are going to a sure block. Take that into account, please. Debresser (talk) 20:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, TroySchulz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dracula 2000. As you've been warned about adding unreferenced material before, even on this particular article, it's difficult for me to believe you're acting out of ignorance. DonIago (talk) 21:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Don Jakoby

The article Don Jakoby has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Theroadislong (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at L.A. Confidential (film). You've been warned multiple times about bloating plot summaries, among other things. Please stop disregarding Wikipedia policies and guidelines. DonIago (talk) 05:25, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dracula 2000

Please note that, per WP:RS/IMDb, IMDb is not considered a reliable source and should not be used in citations. DonIago (talk) 14:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 05:41, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Don Jakoby for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Don Jakoby is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Jakoby until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Black Kite (talk) 20:41, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TroySchulz. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 23:30, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Michael Wandmacher

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

Creator has been blocked. Article is 3 sentences long and then a list of his credits (like a job resume), most of which are sourced. With only one reference.

While all constructive 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. Kellymoat (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michael Wandmacher for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Wandmacher is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Wandmacher until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Kellymoat (talk) 12:58, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]