User talk:Anthony2106

Welcome Anthony2106!

@Paine Ellsworth thanks Anthony2106 (talk) 01:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! Paine  07:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm FreeChurros. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. FreeChurros (talk) 22:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC) (use if an edit is clearly vandalism)[reply]

@FreeChurros but it was funny and mostly true Anthony2106 (talk) 08:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't the place for bits. If you do something like that again, you're at real risk from getting blocked indefinitely from the entire website. You've written summaries for the other episodes, so you should do that for the final one as well. I don't want to have to bring in outside intervention. FreeChurros (talk) 09:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i will do it for the final one. but i have added vadilization in the 6th one, saying quinni looked like taylor swift may not be important and isnt even mentioned by the characters, quinni may have been doing more Dopamine Dressing as a form of unmasking so maybe ill change it. can i add both? i like stupid jokes. ok ok ok ok ok ok ill learn to control my impulses. in fact next time i wont add stupid jokes. i say that but i like it saying she looks like taylor. well i like editing wikipedia more so ill change it now. pls dont ban me Anthony2106 (talk) 10:20, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed. Thank you for remedying that.

I also feel the need to inform you I removed the line about dopamine dressing under episode 6, as you wrote this in a subjective way and used a Reddit comment thread as a source (Which is in violation of WP:RS). As a consequence, I also took out the mention of autistic monologuing. I understand you wrote "pls dont remove the mention of monologing as I like detail about autstic traits", but episode summaries usually focus on the current actions of a character/the gist of scenes, not on side character details and asides. If you can find a way to rewrite that line I deleted in a way that's more appropriate, by all means add it. (I do not watch this series, so I cannot).

If you want advice on how to shorten the episode summaries, I would suggest avoiding any quotes of dialogue & first-person pronouns like "we", as well as looking at the episode lists of other TV shows on Wikipedia to see how they're written.

I think you're on the right track but you still have areas that need much improving. FreeChurros (talk) 22:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FreeChurros thanks, the reddit source wasnt for the dopimen dressing. but i understand, ill just write autistix traits that affect the episode, like in s1e6 quinni had to rest. quinni doesn't say its "autistic burnout" but its so clear it is and it affects the story. so only the important details that affect the story and are non subjective (clear) should be added right?

also reddit+the original episode, is a good sorce right? cus one time i looked at the good doctor summerys and someone wrote that dr lim gose into a ptsd epsidoe. i dont have ptsd so i would of never knew it was called that, if this person learnt it was called that on reddit like on r/ptsd wouldnt that be correct? like people on r/ptsd probably know about ptsd. in that case wouldnt it be ok to refrence reddit? expecily if they mention the episode on r/ptsd then it would be ok right?

in the case of quinni i could just tell it was autistic monologing. but with her unmasking it was hard to know if she was just unmasking or trying to prove a point. so i seid that, then had a source to back me up, and to show that others found it confusing.

but this is verry subjective so its better to just not include it at all isnt it?

"""""

As a consequence, I also took out the mention of autistic monologuing.

"""""

dont punish me by taking out details just ban me instead. i dont realy mean that.

other details can have linked words like on epidose s1e6 "tell" gose to contact tracing as long as it helps the reader learn it can be linked.

but contact tracing was unlinked by someone cus of mos:ol

[[1]] i didnt think it was mos:ol i relinked it.

but linking monlologing isnt mos:ol so i might relink monoluging. like i made the sentece long on perpose to show monoloiging "quinni pauses, gets reddy to say her planed monolog". if your gonna unlink it, do it right and make it say "quinni responds" whats the point of having this hole sentece saying the word monolog, but it not linked to anytjing, stupid.

you should write a user page. Anthony2106 (talk) 01:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it says on the reliable sources page, Reddit is unacceptable in all cases.

Making sentences longer to incorporate Quinni's autistic traits when it doesn't serve the episode summary is part of the problem I'm talking about. And to be frank, though maybe they should have removed the mention of monologuing, I agree with the other user that the linking in this instance went against MOS:OL.

Assume that most other editors are just trying to help you. Please don't call anybody here stupid. That's poor form.

I'm fine without a user page. I don't really need one. FreeChurros (talk) 04:38, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FreeChurros i didnt call you stupid, i just thought its stupid haveing a hole sentence talking about monolouging and not having monolouging link to anything.

i wont refrence reddit anymore. Anthony2106 (talk) 04:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Belbury. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Glossary of video game terms, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. YouTube videos should generally not be used as sources per WP:RSPYT. Belbury (talk) 12:18, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but if the auther of these videos wrote a website about it, then it would be fine. fine ill find better sources. Thanks for helping. Anthony2106 (talk) 13:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, a WP:SELFPUBLISHED website would have the same problem. Gaming websites with proper editorial control are probably the best route to take here. Belbury (talk) 13:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Belbury I was thinking books, that would work. let me just open library geni--- I ment go to the local library like a legal person.

can you please check the source I added to galaga I think that was a small site, but with some things you gotta use small selfpunlished sites cus the topic may be so nesh that the info isnt in books or bigger sites. is that correct? or just folow the rules and just never use them, ill try not to ever use them. Anthony2106 (talk) 13:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

strategywiki.org is definitely inappropriate as a WP:USERGENERATED wiki source that could easily be incorrect. donhodges.com may be usable if Hodges is (per WP:SPS) "an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications", but if he's just some guy with no published videogame expertise then his website's not an appropriate source. Belbury (talk) 14:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]