User talk:MaxFerby

Welcome!

Hello, MaxFerby, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Agora (film). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Viriditas (talk) 21:05, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! MaxFerby (talk) 20:35, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Viriditas (talk) 03:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Agora

Unfortunately, I've had to revert your changes to Agora (film) as they significantly deviate from our best practices for film articles. You may want to read more about the at MOS:FILMS or start a new discussion on the talk page. Viriditas (talk) 08:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

So, I understand. That was a hasty and dirty work for me. Didn't got familiar with that MOS:FILM, either. I am going to return later and do a more standard work when I'll have more time. What doesn't look good for me in both article and MOS:FILM style:

• The "Scientific accuracy" section starts with a low-related information about filming in Vatican, which rather belongs to the filming section.
• Also, even if not citing in this section, I used to think that referring right to the Wikipedia articles is normal.
• The box office is mentioned, however, budget is not.
• The "Reception" section looks just biased for me. The critical response is made of positive opinions, and negative is labeled as christian. This makes it looks like the competent critics are pro, and those christians are contra.

The film is clearly biased and the article doesn't show that at all. MaxFerby (talk) 20:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

How can a fictional film be "biased"? Please explain. Viriditas (talk) 02:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I understand the question. If the requirement would happen to be for every film to precisely depict the history and don't even mention anything which is not 100% accurate information no historical films would be shoot :) But still it can be. This film is not labeled as "historical fiction" but "historical drama film". It also implies it is using some real historical events. The film holds clear anti-christian message and imprints the message for film viewers by showing things that never happened. If a clear distinction would be made between fiction and reality, it would be reasonable. All the things I've written previously still hold on. MaxFerby (talk) 16:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Please talk more about the "clear anti-Christian message". This should be easy if it is clear. Viriditas (talk) 23:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Hm, good idea, suppose I should better make this rather than re-editing the whole article. :) MaxFerby (talk) 21:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm also willing to watch it again to confirm or disprove your thesis. Good sources will help with any new additions/modifications to the article as well. Unfortunately, the editing of the film was quite bad, so it is a pain to watch. It's surprising to me that they spent so much money on the film and failed to edit it properly. Viriditas (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Divna Ljubojevic concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Divna Ljubojevic, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 20:50, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

FYI

Divna Ljubojević. Thanx for your draft work which I've partly used. Thanatos|talk|contributions 00:44, 2 March 2014 (UTC) Thanks you too for contributing. MaxFerby (talk) 00:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at State-sponsored terrorism. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 00:20, 11 March 2014 (UTC)