User Talk: Youknowmyname657

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

July 7

Hullo, and welcome. (I'm always afraid I'm being condescending when I say that, as I'm pretty sure most people have been here a while before they edit, but still.) You seem to be making a lot of very small edits, some of which are marked as "minor" that aren't ↗. Help:Minor edit ↗ might be a good read, as you seem to have a good handle on the wikimarkup syntax and probably don't need the normal "how to" primers. I'll see you around, my talk page is always open. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Links to draft articles

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not introduce links ↗ in actual articles to draft ↗ articles, as you did to :Ari Aster ↗, Kylie Rogers ↗, Manual of Style ↗. {{#ifeq:{{lc:}}|yes|An edit has converted these links, into links to the not-currently-existing page (redlinks) where the draft will be placed if it is eventually accepted. Thus the links will automatically become valid links aimed at the correct target when and if the draft is accepted.|These links have been removed.}} Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

September 2021

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Some Dude From North Carolina. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, :Draft:Most Evil (film) ↗, 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. Thank you.  Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

<table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;">
<tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</td><td>Hello! Voting in the '''2021 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2021|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2021 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2021|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)</small>
</td></tr>
</table>

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2022 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2022|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2022|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Disambiguation link notification for January 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Killer Films ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Past Lives ↗. Such links are usually incorrect ↗, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. <small>(Read the FAQ{{*}} Join us at the DPL WikiProject ↗.)</small>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:A Different Man ↗

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, Youknowmyname657. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:A Different Man ↗, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted ↗, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it ↗ again or request ↗ that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted ↗ so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Priscilla (film) ↗

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, Youknowmyname657. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Priscilla (film) ↗, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted ↗, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it ↗ again or request ↗ that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted ↗ so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Priscilla (film) ↗

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

Hello, Youknowmyname657. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation ↗ submission or Draft ↗ page you started, "Priscilla ↗".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace ↗, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion ↗. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.  <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">'''''L'''''iz</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">'''''Read!''''' ↗ '''''Talk!'''''</sup> 19:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2023 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2023|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2024 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2024 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2024|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Gross inconsistency

Stop.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anora&diff=prev&oldid=1265911358 ↗https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Substance&diff=prev&oldid=1265904278 ↗

When updating the Box Office gross you should '''first update the article body'''. After that also update the Infobox and Lead sections to match. The WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE ↗ is to summarize the key points of the article. The WP:LEAD ↗ is supposed to "summarize not supplant" the key points of the article. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, the article body is the most important part, the Infobox is an added extra. Updating only the Infobox without also updating the other places with the box office gross leaves the article in an inconsistent state and is not helpful, it would be better if you did not edit the article at all, than to leave it in an inconsistent state expecting someone else to fix it. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, being the most up-to-date is not as important thing, and making one part of the article more accurate without also updating the main article makes it less accurate overall. <br>
The small changes in the box office gross figures are not even particularly important, what is more important is the overall comparison to the budget (and other costs) to see if the film is close to being profitable.

Leaving the article in an inconsistent state is not constructive, if you don't have time to update an article properly then please leave it alone. -- 109.76.130.60 ↗ (talk) 07:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
: Are you serious? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anora&diff=1265918126&oldid=1265916290 ↗ You failed to follow the rules, I didn't make up those rules. I understand that many editors have been setting a terrible example but you're the one in the wrong here. Your reason for removing the AS OF template is unclear, it seems contradictory to be worried about making the box office gross numbers more uptodate but to remove the template {{tl|as of}} whose purpose is {{tq|"for cases where an article aims to provide the most current information and will need future updates."}}
: MOS:LARGENUM ↗ {{tq|"Avoid using "approximately", "about", and similar terms with figures."}} "over" and "nearly" are similar terms you should not be using.
: The pointless precision you are attempting to add is a waste of everyone's time. I do not know why you are wasting time with an extra decimal place of precision and and being so very sloppy about it, using vague modifiers, your edit is inconsistent and confused. Stop wasting time updating figures for such insignificant amounts. You're making it worse.
: If you still insist on updating the numbers do so clearly and consistently. Use the same numbers and the same level of decimal precision and avoid vague qualifiers. MOS:LARGENUM ↗ applies. -- 109.76.130.60 ↗ (talk) 08:55, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:: You managed to update The Substancehttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Substance&diff=1265917874&oldid=1265916093 ↗ properly. Using the same number consistently in all three places should be easier for everyone, keep doing that. -- 109.76.130.60 ↗ (talk) 09:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

2025 Utah Wikipedia Day at Sundance Film Festival

{|style="border-radius: 8px; padding:5px; width:90%; font-size:100%; border:3px solid #0F2439; color: #0F2439;" align="center"
|-
|rowspan=4|thumb|left |{{Center|Wikipedia:Wikipedia Day|WP day ↗ cake by Lea-Kim ↗}} ↗
|style="text-align: center;" |{{Flag icon|Utah}} {{large|''Utah Wikipedia Day at Park City during Sundance Film Festival''}} 25px ↗ <br/>
''Sat., Feb. 1, 11:00am–4:00pm MT, The Shop, 1167 Woodside Avenue, Park City, UT 84060''

We invite you to celebrate Wikipedia's 24th birthday during Sundance ↗. This is one of many '''Wikipedia Day''' ↗ celebrations. Join us either in person or remotely. ''Read more: '''→here←''' ↗''
|rowspan=4|{{Annotated image
| image = Egyptian Theatre (2024)-L1004366.jpg
| image-width = 162 
| image-left = 0 
| image-top = -7 
| width = 160 
| height = 83 
| float = left
| annotations = 
| caption = {{Center|Egyptian Theatre ↗ photo, Frank Schulenburg ↗}}
}}
|-
|}
<div style="text-align: center; font-size: x-small;">21:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from this list, please remove your name from this list ↗.</div>

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Are you trying to edit-war on "Hamnet"?

I have tried to include many of your changes; your response is to wipe out large chunks of other people's work. Could what you're doing be considered edit-warring, and disrespect of others, just for your own "fun" which you self-proclaim? If so, it should be avoided. Thanks. John315 (talk) 07:51, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

:: No John, I am not trying to edit-war. I am simply trying to condense your summary into a suitable length. Frankly, I find it a little rich that you're assuming I'm out here trying to wipe out other people's work on the article when much of the reverts over the weekend regarding ''Hamnet'' have come from you and you only and most of the edits in the past 48 hours have come between us regarding the plot. I have done little to the article other than attempt to condense the summary and have done nothing to prevent others from working on the article.

::As for fun, the "fun" I am having is from your insistence on adding the word count disclaimer which suggests a 400-700 word count, followed by you feeling the need to keep the summary at exactly 700 while you persist in erasing ''my'' work, especially considering that, based on your edit history, you have added that same disclaimer onto most of the film articles you have worked on, only to end up having your work trimmed down by other users. --Youknowmyname657 (talk) 08:23, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

:::I often come to agreements with other users, and keep things close to 700 words. I've tried to keep a lot of your stuff in my revisions, with no thanks from you yet. ...Are there conditions under which you'd agree to 700 words? Because that is allowed, and people including the person who did the Nine Herbs Charm, suffer when you wipe out their work. Thanks. John315 (talk) 08:29, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

::::Your history with other users when it comes to agreements tells me otherwise. I've yet to thank you because your revisions leave much to be desired, unfortunately. I'm confused as to why you're a stickler for 700 words. I am not the first editor to tell you this. The phrase "between 400-700 words" is in the disclaimer you love so much. ''Hamnet'' does not need 700 words. What is the need to tell people how to pronounce Agnes' name? there is no need to provide a whole paragraph about Will sticking up for himself; why are we providing minor details of the Shakespeares' family lives? The guidelines tell us we don't need to recite the whole film.

::::As for making the other editors "suffer"... John, forgive me if I sound facetious, but this is Wikipedia, not a slaughterhouse. Checking the history of the article, Hjörþrimul actually created a new section to accommodate the history of the Nine Herbs Charm ↗, which remains up as of this message, so why include it in the plot summary, especially as the charm matters less and less as Agnes and Will's relationship progresses. --Youknowmyname657 (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::Am going to sleep soon, but I'll think about this. Talk to you tomorrow. Be well. John315 (talk) 09:13, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::Okie doke. I’ll be around. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 09:15, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Was out all day and some of the night, am back. -- 700 words gives, among other things, maximum scope for many people to offer their contributions, including Hjörþrimul. If he/she wants to mention it briefly in the summary, maybe that's o.k. 700 words should never be bad, as long as there's useful things to say. The weird pronunciation of Agnes' name is o.k. to mention, otherwise people might get it wrong. The paragraph on John beating Will, is fairly short. Etc. Even some of your own contributions, had more words than a simpler version might have. ...So, I hope you are comfy now with 700 words, given my explanation; if not yet, what is the maximum number of words with which you're comfortable? Thanks. John315 (talk) 04:54, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::You say 700 words provides maximum scope for people to offer their contributions, so why do you keep on removing mine?Hjörþrimul has, as of this message, 20 edits total to their name, most of which are towards articles regarding folklore so I don't think they'll be too broken up about their contributions. As more users come around to seeing ''Hamnet'', more of them will contribute to the article, especially as award season arrives, so eventually the "maximum scope" you keep trying to put back will grow smaller the more contributions are made. A simpler version is the sort of thing I'm trying to bring to the plot that you keep on lengthening.
:::::::::Regarding your edits, the pronunciation of Agnes is, I repeat, a redundant detail. May I asked who okayed that? There are plenty of films with characters that have names that sound strange and their names get no pronunciation in the character or summary sections. The paragraph on John beating Will is also redundant as the average reader can put 2 and 2 together that neither Will and Agnes are welcome in their families' lives.
:::::::::Yet again, the 400-700 word limit is a guide where you should aim for ''less than'' 700 words, hence the word "between". No one is saying 700 words is bad, we're saying it isn't the aim. --Youknowmyname657 (talk) 05:26, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::I don't see how Agnes' pronunciation is redundant -- maybe if someone's seen the film, but not everyone has. ...Maybe John beating Will can be reduced to one line; the great Will Shakespeare getting beat up is a pretty big thing, and deserves at least some mention. ...I wasn't trying to remove your contributions per se, I was trying to preserve the 700-word version, rather than the 500-some-word version you authored. (And I preserved plenty of your contributions.) I can envision a 700-word version that keeps some or all of your contributions, if you are interested. ...And if you'd prefer something in the high-600 words, that may be imaginable. Thanks. John315 (talk) 05:36, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::The pronunciation of Agnes is redundant because it matters little to the events of the film as well as the summary. Agnes says her name at the start of the film, and everyone moves right along. When discussing the greatest writer of the English language, people usually don't bring up the abuse he got from his father, certainly not on our article of him. There isn't much evidence of his early life anyway. Besides, the film focuses on his writing, which even then is set aside to focus on Agnes.
:::::::::::All of this talk of you retaining my contributions is meaningless because in the end, you end up putting most of yours back in. -Youknowmyname657 (talk) 05:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::Ha ha, I didn't know you objected to having "AHN-yes" at all in the article, rather than just in the (word-limited) Plot section. If you don't want it anywhere, maybe I can live with it...
::::::::::::Anyway, what I've been doing, is using your own c. 648-word version from 03:41, 6 December 2025, and adding to it. (To my knowledge, I took out only an "s" which was a spelling error) It's about 700 words (thus, I added c. 52 words), but again, besides my additions and the vanished "s", this is your own version, so there may not be much to complain about, since I haven't removed stuff. It's under the dotted line below. Please let me know what you think:
::::::::::::----------
::::::::::::A written prologue states that in Stratford, Renaissance England, "Hamnet" and "Hamlet" were considered the same name.[6]
::::::::::::Agnes Hathaway walks in a forest, summoning a hawk to land on her falconry glove. Nearby, a ear-ringed tutor named William Shakespeare leaves his students and visits Hathaway's barn, where they chat and then kiss, but she then tells him to go and stay away.
::::::::::::Agnes does not discourage gossip that labels her a forest witch's daughter; her mother taught her herbal lore, which Agnes later uses to heal a cut on William's forehead. Her mother died young, and Agnes, sorrowing, grew up with a stepmother who didn't care for her.
::::::::::::Agnes spends much of her time in the forest, where there is a mysterious cave. William visits her again, and she asks him to tell her a story. He recounts the legend of Orpheus and Eurydice, much to Agnes's delight. She holds his hand and foretells his future as something great; she sees herself dying with two children.
::::::::::::The pair consummate their relationship, and Agnes becomes pregnant. Her parents banish her from their house; William's family is unhappy about their prospective marriage, but they marry. Agnes has her first child, Susanna, in the woods. William's father John tries to force him into manual labor and strikes him; William pushes back and says he will not tolerate abuse.
::::::::::::Agnes, pregnant again, sees William's frustrated attempts at writing and decides that he must go to London to immerse himself in the theater community there; he leaves her and Susanna in Stratford. During labor, William's mother Mary restrains Agnes from going to the woods to give birth. In agony, Agnes gives birth to a boy, Hamnet, and then to a girl, Judith, who appears stillborn, but, after despairing that the child might not go to heaven, Agnes manages to revive the baby.
::::::::::::The twins maintain a close relationship. Agnes predicts that Hamnet, who wants to be a swordsman in his father's theater company, will flourish. William's career is successful, and the family buys the largest house in Stratford.
::::::::::::Agnes's bird dies and the family buries it in a ceremony in the forest; Agnes tells them a story about the bird carrying off their wishes in its heart, and Hamnet agrees with his mother that one can see the bird's spirit in the air. (A bird-related song plays often during the film.)
::::::::::::In London, William sees a puppet show depicting the plague carrying people off to death. In Stratford, Judith contracts the plague, but Hamnet evokes the tale of the deceased bird to encourage her. Later, he lies beside her and proclaims he wants to take her place. Judith recovers, but Hamnet becomes ill; he envisions himself in an empty house, calling for his mother. Agnes is unable to cure Hamnet, and he dies. William returns home to discover Hamnet lying in repose.
::::::::::::Agnes is filled with anger that William is returning to London so soon after Hamnet dies, causing their relationship to strain. She discovers she is unable to see the future anymore. Back in London, by the Thames, William considers suicide, as he ruefully gives his character Hamlet's speech, "To be or not to be".
::::::::::::Agnes' estranged stepmother gives her a print notice circulating in the town announcing that the "Tragedie of Hamlet" will be performed in London. Agnes is upset that William has invoked the name of their dead son in his new play.
::::::::::::Agnes and her brother Bartholomew travel to London to attend the first performance of Hamlet. Initially outraged, she begins to appreciate that the play is a tribute to her son. William plays the ghost of Hamlet's father, and a scene with him and Hamlet moves her.
::::::::::::When Hamlet, dying, nears the edge of the stage, Agnes reaches forward to touch the actor's hand, and the audience, caught up in the emotion of the scene, also reach out their hands to him. She envisions Hamnet, in the empty house, moving from sadness to a smile, and walking into the backstage and disappearing through a hole reminiscent of her mystical cave in the forest. Agnes laughs and then silently smiles happily for the first time since his death. John315 (talk) 07:19, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Your need to continue bringing up Agnes' pronunciation tells me that ''you'' will be bothered with its removal. In any case, I'll make myself clear: the pronunciation is unneeded and unnecessary in any and all sections of the article, period. Be done with it.
:::::::::::::Scrolling through your summary, several details pop up, most of them unnecessary. Why bring up Will's earring? Why mention the bird song as the bird dies near the middle of the film? The song the bird makes is likely for something in the score section. Like I stated in the edits, Agnes' relationship with nature peters out the further the film goes on. Why bring up John specifically when Will's family are all in disapproval of his career choice? You might as well being up the breakfast argument Will has with his brother near the start. The final sentence is abbreviated fine in the current summary. I prefer how I start the summary.
:::::::::::::Neither of our summaries are perfect. There's a better way of informing our reader that Will goes unnamed for much of the film; must we keep bringing up Agnes' anger and grief? There has to be a better way of integrating Will and his work with ''Hamlet'' into the summary as well.
:::::::::::::We have discussed the word limit. You can, and ''should'' make it less than 700 words. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 07:50, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Okay, it's down to 649 now, partly by my abbreviating some of your stuff. (If you want shorter, you have to "sacrifice" too, though I kept your meaning, with a lower word count.) The bird-related song and earring are gone. John beating Will is further abbreviated, and put next to Will's writing frustrations, which makes thematic sense. I put in that Will is unnamed for a while. ...I think it's harder to cut out Agnes' grief (the film is largely about this), and I'm not sure "Hamlet" can be much better integrated. -- But again, it's below 650 now, and below the dotted line (links, italics, etc. can be put in later):
::::::::::::::---------
::::::::::::::A written prologue states that in Stratford, Renaissance England, "Hamnet" and "Hamlet" were considered the same name.[6]
::::::::::::::Agnes Hathaway walks in a forest, summoning a hawk to land on her falconry glove. Nearby, a tutor named William Shakespeare (unnamed until mid-film) leaves his students and visits Hathaway's barn, where they chat and then kiss, but she then tells him to go.
::::::::::::::Agnes shrugs off gossip labeling her a forest witch's daughter; her mother taught her herbal lore, which Agnes later uses to heal a cut on William's forehead. Her mother died young, and Agnes grew up with an uncaring stepmother.
::::::::::::::Agnes spends much of her time in the forest, where there is a mysterious cave. William visits her, and she asks for a story. He recounts the legend of Orpheus and Eurydice, much to Agnes's delight. She holds his hand and foretells his future as something great; she sees herself dying with two children.
::::::::::::::The pair consummate their relationship, and Agnes becomes pregnant. Her parents banish her from their house; William's family discourages their marriage, but they marry. Agnes has her first child, Susanna, in the woods.
::::::::::::::William's father John beats him for not doing manual labor; William pushes back and refuses abuse. Agnes, pregnant again, sees William's frustrated attempts at writing and decides that he must go to London's theater community; he leaves her and Susanna in Stratford. During labor, William's mother Mary restrains Agnes from going to the woods to give birth. In agony, Agnes gives birth to a boy, Hamnet, and then a girl, Judith, who appears stillborn, but, after despairing that the child might not go to heaven, Agnes manages to revive the baby.
::::::::::::::The twins maintain a close relationship. Agnes predicts that Hamnet, who wants to be a swordsman in his father's theater company, will flourish. William's career is successful, and he buys the largest house in Stratford.
::::::::::::::Agnes's bird dies and the family buries it in a ceremony in the forest; Agnes tells them a story about the bird carrying off their wishes in its heart, and Hamnet agrees with his mother that one can see the bird's spirit in the air.
::::::::::::::In London, William sees a puppet show depicting the plague carrying people off to death. In Stratford, Judith contracts the plague, but Hamnet evokes the tale of the deceased bird to encourage her. Later, he lies beside her and proclaims he wants to take her place. Judith recovers, but Hamnet becomes ill; he envisions himself in an empty house, calling for his mother. Agnes is unable to cure Hamnet, and he dies. William returns home to discover Hamnet lying in repose.
::::::::::::::Agnes is angry that William is returning to London so soon after Hamnet dies, straining their relationship. She discovers she is unable to see the future anymore. Back in London, by the Thames, William considers suicide, as he ruefully gives his character Hamlet's speech, "To be or not to be".
::::::::::::::Agnes' estranged stepmother gives her a print notice circulating in town announcing that the "Tragedie of Hamlet" will be performed in London. Agnes is upset that William's new play invokes their dead son's name.
::::::::::::::Agnes and her brother Bartholomew travel to London to attend the first performance of Hamlet. Initially outraged, she begins to appreciate that the play is a tribute to her son. William plays the ghost of Hamlet's father, and a scene with him and Hamlet moves her.
::::::::::::::When Hamlet, dying, nears the edge of the stage, Agnes reaches forward to touch the actor's hand, and the audience, caught up in the emotion of the scene, also reach out their hands to him. She envisions Hamnet, in the empty house, moving from sadness to a smile, and walking backstage by disappearing through a hole reminiscent of her mystical cave in the forest. Agnes laughs and then silently smiles happily for the first time since his death. John315 (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::"Sacrifice"? *eyeroll* Here you go again, making this website a bigger deal than it is. It is you who has to "sacrifice", John. My word count for the summary was lower than the ones you have been presenting me, all because you continue to haggle on details regarding Agnes' beliefs, Will's abuse which happens in exactly ''one scene'', feeling the need to stretch out the final sentence ("Agnes laughs and then silently smiles happily for the first time since his death" -> "Agnes laughs, smiling for the first time since his death" Boom, done), and bringing up the dead bird when the elements of nature matter less as the film goes on.
:::::::::::::::I "sacrificed" all those details, John, but alas. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 03:58, 9 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::Well, what do you want? What is your alternative proposal? John315 (talk) 04:38, 9 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::After all, you said, "We have discussed the word limit. You can, and should make it less than 700 words." I did this. Would you like to acknowledge that? If not, why'd you mention "less than 700 words"? John315 (talk) 04:45, 9 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::Still waiting. Thanks. John315 (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::My only proposal is to shorten the summary. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 02:15, 10 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::::Okay, if that's your only proposal: it's now down to 630 words, well below the 648 of your version I cite above. I made some specific changes you liked. (Also, I shortened the John-beating-Will thing; the dead bird, Hamnet cites to Judith, so it should be kept, I think.) Below the dotted line:
::::::::::::::::::::-----
::::::::::::::::::::A written prologue states that in Stratford, Renaissance England, "Hamnet" and "Hamlet" were considered the same name.[6]
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes Hathaway walks in a forest, summoning a hawk to land on her falconry glove. Nearby, a tutor, William Shakespeare (unnamed until mid-film), leaves his students and visits Hathaway's barn, where they chat and then kiss, but she then tells him to go.
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes shrugs off gossip labeling her a forest witch's daughter; her mother, who died young, leaving Agnes with an uncaring stepmother, taught Agnes herbal lore, which she later uses to heal a cut on William's forehead.
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes is often in the forest, where there is a mysterious cave. William visits her, and she asks for a story. He recounts the legend of Orpheus and Eurydice, much to Agnes's delight. She holds his hand and foretells his future as something great; she sees herself dying with two children.
::::::::::::::::::::The pair consummate their relationship, and Agnes becomes pregnant. Her parents banish her from home; William's family discourages their marriage, but they marry. Agnes has her first child, Susanna, in the woods.
::::::::::::::::::::William's father John beats him for refusing manual labor; William pushes back. Agnes, pregnant again, sees William's frustrated attempts at writing and decides that he must go to London's theater community; he leaves her and Susanna in Stratford. During labor, William's mother Mary restrains Agnes from visiting the woods to give birth. In agony, Agnes gives birth to a boy, Hamnet, and then a girl, Judith, who appears stillborn, but, after despairing that the child might not go to heaven, Agnes manages to revive the baby.
::::::::::::::::::::The twins maintain a close relationship. Agnes predicts that Hamnet, who wants to be a swordsman in his father's theater company, will flourish. William's career is successful, and he buys the largest house in Stratford.
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes's bird dies and the family buries it in a forest ceremony; Agnes tells them a story about the bird carrying off their wishes in its heart, and Hamnet agrees with his mother that one can see the bird's spirit in the air.
::::::::::::::::::::In London, William sees a puppet show depicting the plague carrying people off to death. In Stratford, Judith contracts the plague, but Hamnet evokes the tale of the deceased bird to encourage her. Later, he lies beside her and proclaims he wants to take her place. Judith recovers, but Hamnet becomes ill; he envisions himself in an empty house, calling for his mother. Agnes is unable to cure Hamnet, and he dies. William returns home to discover Hamnet lying in repose.
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes is angry that William is returning to London so soon after Hamnet dies, straining their relationship. She discovers she is unable to see the future anymore. Back in London, by the Thames, William considers suicide, as he ruefully gives his character Hamlet's speech, "To be or not to be".
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes' estranged stepmother gives her a print notice circulating in town announcing that the "Tragedie of Hamlet" will be performed in London. Agnes is upset that William's new play invokes their dead son's name.
::::::::::::::::::::Agnes and her brother Bartholomew travel to London to attend the first performance of Hamlet. Initially outraged, she begins to appreciate that the play is a tribute to her son. William plays the ghost of Hamlet's father, and a scene with him and Hamlet moves her.
::::::::::::::::::::When Hamlet, dying, nears the edge of the stage, Agnes reaches forward to touch the actor's hand, and the audience, caught up in the emotion of the scene, also reach out their hands to him. She envisions Hamnet, in the empty house, moving from sadness to a smile, and walking backstage by disappearing through a hole reminiscent of her mystical cave in the forest. Agnes laughs, smiling for the first time since his death. John315 (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::Hello? You there? John315 (talk) 06:41, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::::::I assume you have approved my new version, by silence. If I post it, then, don't revert it, please, because you've had over a day to comment on it. Such reversion might look bad to objective observers. Thanks. John315 (talk) 17:52, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::::If you haven't approved all of it, feel free to comment further, but I could post at any time. John315 (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::::::::Hello, as an observer to this back and forth, and reading your proposed edit to the current version, the issue is not the exact word limit. Rather, the issue is the content.
::::::::::::::::::::::::Wikipedia's guidelines on plot synopsis states that the synopsis does not need to include every single detail, such as how every character feels in every scene (such as Agnes's response to rumours about being the daughter of a forest witch) or descriptions of every setting or interaction. The synopsis should only key plot points and not include excessive detail. ~2025-39930-50 ↗ (talk) 01:16, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::::::Thank you for sticking up for me, ~2025-39930-50. This is the main point I keep trying to bring up to John which is why I'm harping on about word count.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::If you noticed in the middle of our discussion, John raised a point about providing a "maximum scope" to allow room for other editors to review the summary, which is what I did with my copyedit. Unfortunately, John seems committed to retaining unneeded plot details.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::John's assumption about I remaining quiet about his summary being the correct version goes against the ideals of this website being an encyclopedia where all are welcome to edit. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 01:30, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::::::2025, I see you're a brand new editor, as in, maybe in the last 12 hours new. Welcome. ...I don't put in every single detail. I wish there was more room for details, but 700 is the max. And one man's excessive detail is another's necessary detail. Every Plot could probably be cut down to 100 words (or 50?), but then why are 700 words allowed? ...And I welcome all to edit, including the "Nine Herbs Charm" person that Youknowmyname657 erased, which I'd ideally like restored. ...After all that, is my 630-word version acceptable -- I've been waiting over a day now --, and if not, what alternative does 657 offer, instead of just ceaseless, unproductive criticism? Do I have any say, or can 657 just veto anything I want to do and impose their own version at any time? John315 (talk) 01:58, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::I actually do have an account and haven't logged in, so I'm not a brand new editor, just one that prefers not to draw anyone's ire.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::A detail like the Nine Herbs Charm, for example is interesting, but it's not necessary for to understand the overall plot of narrative. If that information was removed from the summary, a reader with no knowledge of ''Hamnet'' would still be able to understand the plot. I see that another editor separated that particular detail into another section (Literary References), which seems more appropriate as a way of including that reference in the article so that it is still available, but allows the plot section to remain concise. ~2025-39930-50 ↗ (talk) 02:34, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::"not draw anyone's ire"! Haw. ...Well, I left the Charm out of my 630-word version above, showing I'm trying to compromise. Too, I used verbatim 657's version of the last line of the Plot. So, hopefully the Plot can be amended along the lines of my latest version above, instead of days of endless discussion. John315 (talk) 03:11, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Fall of Sir Douglas Weatherford ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mubi ↗.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Lenny Abrahamson film

Hi, I just have a few concerns regarding your edits on Draft:Untitled Lenny Abrahamson film ↗. You recently made some edits that a) removed Element Pictures as the Ireland distributor, and b) named Abrahamson as the screenwriter. None of the sources I read specifically said that he was writing the film, only directing it. Since he has never written his own movies, I opted to leave that section blank for now. As for Element Pictures, https://deadline.com/2026/02/tom-burke-eve-hewson-lenny-abrahamsons-film-element-1236725797/ this ↗ Deadline article uses the words, "set to start shooting in Dublin on March 2 for Element Pictures." The last paragraph of the article lists the non-Ireland distributors, so I took it to mean that Element would be distributing in Ireland. ThanatosApprentice (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

:Hey Thanatos. Sorry for the wait. To answer a few of your concerns, Element ''has'' distributed several of their films, but these days, the distribution is under a different name called Volta Pictures. Scanning the articles from THR, ScreenDaily, Variety, and Deadline, Volta doesn't come up when the article discusses distributors. I removed Element distributing as Abrahamson's previous films were distributed by different companies in Ireland (Room by StudioCanal, Little Stranger by 20th Century), which led me to assume Element is waiting for a distribution deal for Abrahamson's next film.

:As for Abrahamson writing, ScreenDaily and THR added that detail in both of their articles. Lemme know if you have any more concerns. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 23:12, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Notice of ANI discussion

link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ↗ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Second report for disruptive editing on the Marty Supreme page ↗. You are receiving this notice as you have not been made aware of the thread before now and I have specifically named you in a comment regarding an edit that you made. (As an aside, I don't have an issue with your editing and the focus has been about a different, but related issue. Just covering my bases here regarding notifications.) --Super Goku V (talk) 12:08, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Where should this list go? This is an important list

Television series

Big Fish Entertainment LLC (including Half Moon Pictures)

* Shows produced:

#America's Top Dog ↗ (2020-present)

#Amy Schumer Learns to Cook ↗ (2020-2020)

#Black Ink Crew ↗ (2013-2023)

#Black Ink Crew: Chicago ↗ (2015-2022)

#Black Ink Crew: Los Angeles (Compton) ↗ (2019-2023)

#Bomb Patrol Afghanistan ↗ (2011-2012)

#Cartel Crew ↗ (2019-2021)

#DC Cupcakes ↗ (2010-2013)

#Girls Cruise ↗ (2019-2019)

#History's Greatest Mysteries ↗ (2020-present)

#How Far Is Tattoo Far? ↗ (2018-2019)

#Live PD ↗ (2016-2020)

#Live PD Presents: PD Cam ↗ (2018-2020) (2025-present)

#Live PD Presents: Women on Patrol ↗ (2018-2018)

#Live Rescue ↗ (2019-2021)

#Love & Hip Hop: Atlanta ↗ (2012-2022) (2023-present)

#Love & Hip Hop: Hollywood ↗ (2014-2019)

#Love & Hip Hop: Miami ↗ (2018-present)

#Love & Hip Hop: New York ↗ (2011-2020)

#Martha Knows Best ↗ (2020-2020)

#On Patrol: Live ↗ (2022-present)

#Ring Nation ↗ (2022-2023)

#Seeking Brother Husband ↗ (2023-2023)

Evolution Media

* Shows produced:

#Bands Reunited ↗ (2004-2006)

#Beach Patrol ↗ (2006-2008)

#Beverly Hills Nannies ↗ (2012-2012)

#Big Brother (American TV series) ↗ (2000-present)

#Botched (TV series) ↗ (2014-present)

#Bug Juice ↗ (1998-2001)

#Code: 9 ↗ (2012-2012)

#Fear Factor ↗ (2001-2006) (2011-2012) (2017-2018) (2026-present)

#Growing Up Supermodel ↗ (2017-2017)

#Growing Up Twisted ↗ (2010-2010)

#High School Confidential (TV series) ↗ (2008-2008)

#Ocean Force ↗ (2007-2009)

#Private Lives of Nashville Wives ↗ (2014-2014)

#Prom Queens (TV series) ↗ (2012-2012)

#Sin City Rules ↗ (2012-2013)

#Switched! (American TV series) ↗ (2003-2004)

#The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills ↗ (2010-present)

#The Real Housewives of Orange County ↗ (2006-present)

#The Real Housewives of Rhode Island ↗ (2026-present)

#Totally Hoops ↗ (2001-2001)

#Totally in Tune ↗ (2002-2002)

#Vanderpump Rules ↗ (2013-present)

#Vanderpump Rules: Jax & Brittany Take Kentucky ↗ (2017-2017)

#Yo Momma (TV series) ↗ (2006-2007)

#10 Years Younger (American TV series) ↗ (2004-2009)

Lucilla D'Agostino has been in sole charge of Half Moon Pictures, Big Fish Entertainment and Evolution Media since 2023.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://deadline.com/2023/07/mgm-alternative-shake-up-lucilla-dagostino-to-run-big-fish-evolution-1235434269/|title=MGM Alternative Shakeup: Lucilla D'Agostino To Run 'On Patrol: Live' Producer Big Fish & 'Real Housewives' Producer Evolution As Dan Cesareo Exits|last=White|first=Peter|date=July 11, 2023|access-date=July 29, 2023|work=Deadline Hollywood ↗|archive-date=July 29, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230729155539/https://deadline.com/2023/07/mgm-alternative-shake-up-lucilla-dagostino-to-run-big-fish-evolution-1235434269/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>Wonder Women of New York 2024: Lucilla D’Agostino ↗, Multichannel News ↗, 03/11/2024, by Stuart Miller</ref> Alympia.Ninan (talk) 17:17, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

:Most of these programs are listed in the list of MGM Television programs article. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 17:30, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
::please send a link to the article. we need a comprehensive list. Alympia.Ninan (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
:::All of these programs are listed in the List of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Television programs ↗ articles under the names of the production companies. Youknowmyname657 (talk) 06:29, 27 February 2026 (UTC)