Hi Wikicontributor12! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 04:35, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia from Twitter! dogman15 (talk) 17:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your information could be useful. However, I couldn't find an appropriate section for it. You can transfer the information to the characters' pages, like Anna.Forbidden User (talk) 17:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Wikicontributor12. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! ALittleQuenhi (talk to me) 03:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching my mistake about the post-credits scene; I couldn't really tell what kind of bug it was. I'm not entirely sure that it's a fly, either, but you're right that it's definitely not a beetle. AmericanLemming (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. You're welcome. By the way, I apologize if I sounded harsh in my edit summary. Part of me was thinking that it might have been vandalism, (I have had to clean up a lot of nonsense edits on various articles lately.) Also, you may be right about it not being a fly, I'll have to find some screen shots and double see if I can be more specific.Wikicontributor12 (talk) 09:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Penn Zero: Part-Time Hero has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Dcbanners (talk) 19:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 Anna (Disney) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikicontributor12, there is no ban on summary statements in film articles. Some WP:Film editors are for them, especially if they are WP:Reliably sourced, and other WP:Film editors are against them; see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 52#Summary statement for "Reception" section. In some cases where you are removing these statements from film articles, editors might have reached WP:Consensus on the matter at the talk pages of those articles; I've been involved with a number of film articles where this is the case. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, whether we include a summary statement in the critical reception section or not, it's usually best to summarize the film's reception in the lead, per WP:Lead. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:54, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message. I'll keep that in mind. Wikicontributor12 (talk) 05:30, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stevie Wermers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frozen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again, Wikicontributor12. The 2015 Fantastic Four film did not simply underperform; it bombed, as is clear by the sources. So I re-linked "box office bomb" under "underperformed" as a WP:Pipelink. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thank you for letting me know.Wikicontributor12 (talk) 08:34, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's always Disneyland Park, never Disneyland park. The entire phrase operates as a proper noun, or more correctly, a proper name, and hence both words are capitalized. See Noun phrase. --Coolcaesar (talk) 09:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am well aware of all that. That's not the point. I never said that I objected to the edit. Grammatical typos happen. Like I said, still no reason to call it "weird". It come across as judgemental. That is all. Wikicontributor12 (talk) 09:38, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although there would have been no great harm to Wikipedia had that ep counter on The Lion Guard been one number too high for a few hours, things like TV schedule changes are one of the reasons for WP:NOTTVGUIDE and, more generally, WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Thank you for understanding. Jeh (talk) 02:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. Thank you for the message.Wikicontributor12 (talk) 02:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've noticed you've taken out the quick review summary line that is part of most film's "Critical Response" sections multiple times with the edit summary, "We do not need to summarize in this section. Let the sources speak for themselves." When you say "we", who are you talking about, exactly? It's long-standing practice to offer a quick summation of whether a film has received positive, negative, or mixed reviews, unless one of those descriptions is a matter of contention. It does seem like a unilateral decision to just delete that sentence or phrase from pages without a consensus being established first. Rockypedia (talk) 14:40, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]