User talk:CSOCSOCSO

Welcome...

Hello, CSOCSOCSO, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Mario1987 (talk) 20:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I've deleted Category:Slashers = Quasi-realism. You appear to have created a one-sentence article in the Category "namespace". If you'd like to tell me what you were trying to do, I'll try to help you out. Thanks! ➔ REDVEЯS says: at the third stroke the time will be 20:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I see. Well, we don't have redirect or alternate-named categories (the software doesn't do it). But what you can do is find the category that you feel is not comprehensively named and add a sentence to it to explain what other terms it encompasses. In other words, edit the category that is wrong rather than creating a new one. Hope this helps! ➔ REDVEЯS says: at the third stroke the time will be 20:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, you can edit Category:Slasher films and mention there something like "Slasher films also include quasi-realism" or something like that. ➔ REDVEЯS says: at the third stroke the time will be 20:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me make myself clear that I had no intention of being deceptive to anyone! I wasn't even aware that changing my user format was a crime...the information provided on the dos and don't's is so unclear, that it's hard to be sure what i'm doing is right or wrong. As to why I changed usernames? I seem to have been unnecessarily penalised for a slight alteration, that i now regret and have since rectified considerably. Completely lost as to how I could appeal against it and to who I could direct my pleas too. Besides considering my frequent slip ups due to my somewhat impulsive snap decisions I just botch up considerably more and proceed to irritate and annoy others further. So for as an early New Year's Resolution I decided here and now to somewhat decrease in my contributions to editing existing articles, while continuing to provide more sources of brand new infomation! By changing my user name I would see this as a reminder to not interfere with other people's hard written work! See I would like to be very much to stay a part of your community an not be ostracized so readily by others. So on making this confession I don't expect forgivness, but rather understanding that I'm completely in the dark on most of what is frowned upon on this site!

• I was going out of my way to try to do the following below!

Clean start under a new name If you have a negative track record and you have decided to make a genuine, clean and honest new start, and do not wish it to be tarnished by your prior conduct, you can simply discontinue using the old account(s), and create an unconnected new account which becomes the only account you then use, and is used in a good manner. If you start under a new name, you should be aware that the new account will be noticed: If you continue editing the same articles, or your writing style is so distinctive that it will quickly be noticed, then it is likely a connection will be made, and the perceived concealment may only cause it to be seen negatively when discovered. (If you change your behavior, and the articles you work on, there is no reason for a connection to be made between the two accounts.) If identified by checkuser or accused of being a sockpuppet later on: Checkuser is only used when there is a suspected breach of policy. If you don't use the old account, there is no reason a request would be made.' View this clean start under a new name as a courtesy extended to you; do not abuse this courtesy by engaging in disruptive behavior again or to mislead others. For the sake of openness, users making a new start are encouraged to email the arbitration committee (arbcom-l@wikipedia.org) to identify the old and new accounts. < (I don't know exactly how to do this...no seriously...I just don't)!

• I not going out of my way to be a vandal or being deceptive by way of this sockpuppetry, I never was indending on being a nuisance to anyone, particularly to the editors.
• I was not going out way of being a disruptive influence to anyone or anybody and was not trying to provoke any reactions from others. Though I now can understand why this and once again I apologize for dragging this out! Same goes over any accusations of copyright infringement
• Just don't banning or being indefinitely blocked, over this, most of what I've done was never intended to be problematic to anyone else...and it was never ever intended to be deliberate in any way. Please do take this into consideration before you bar me...that's all i'm begging you for!
• Though some part of me knows this won't make a single shred of diffrence; perhaps if I in future make it clear to anyone on my talk of what I was going to do and enquire if this was to be okay before I proceed? Maybe not I suppose

--CSOCSOCSO (talk) 01:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC) --CSOCSOCSO (talk) 01:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC) --CSOCSOCSO (talk) 01:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tag has been removed. Your editing history isn't vandalism or intentional disruption so please don't feel that you are/were being accused of engaging in that behavior. IrishGuy ^talk 19:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be my place to ask but shouldn't the following be given a category of the own since technically, they pre-date (before 1974) the whole concept of the slasher genre?

Peeping Tom (film)
Homicidal
Chamber of Horrors (film)
Hands of the Ripper
Night of a 1000 Cats

Last one notably inparticular since many writters of film magazines such as Empire (magazine) and Total Film consider this one as a proper Proto-slasher; Psycho (1960 film)

I'm not so sure but is Deranged considered a proto-slasher too since it emulates considerably Psycho?

Alice, Sweet Alice Has often been classed as a Giallo than a slasher due to it's unconventional style. I maybe wrong but is this really considered a slasher movie?

--CSOCSOCSO (talk) 16:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)--CSOCSOCSO (talk) 16:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)--CSOCSOCSO (talk) 16:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)--CSOCSOCSO (talk) 16:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of Iconic status; those behind Wrong Turn and it's sequal have clearly set out to make the character of Three-Finger into there (for lack of a better term) symbol. Where else, many on Internet movie discussion boards would they have him on the front cover of the first film and have him survive at the story's end to appear in the sequel (which from what I gathered he is still alive by that movie's conclusion).
Plus taking into consideration that he somewhat stands out in the first film, since he has more notable traits and mannerisms that distinguishes him from the other pair of mountain men.
Shouldn't a article that goes into more detail with him be submitted? --CSOCSOCSO (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping to add some entries into the article of Public information films, plus some seperate articles.

FUR...You Deserve It! was public information advert, made notable by it's appearance on The Best Of Tarrant On TV and being uploaded onto YouTube. It is dated to have first came out back in 1982...and seems to have appeared in several diffrent countries. Displaying many sub-sections of the fur trading, such as seal hunting, poaching, and the use of animal trapping. The basic premise is of trappers and poachers, catching and killing people in fur coats...as it seems there are no more animals left to skin! The events are accompanied by a brooding, dramatic, electronic score that plays forbodingly over the at least two minute short.

First scene; Opening on a bespectacled woman walking down the street, she suddenly falls screaming in such away they she has caught her foot on something.

Second scene; We then cut to a scene in which a man is crouched, looking for a the sniper scope of a hunting rifle. It's seen that he is observing a couple (both wearing fur coats) making there way towards a park drinking fountain. As the female makes her way towards the fountain, she is unexpectedly shot, leaving her draped over it. On seeing this her nervous partner looks about him then flees, only to be shot in the back. The sniper goes over to the bodies wipes his hands on the fur, then drags both of them away

First scene (again); We cut back to the opening scene, where we see a pair of fur covered feet advancing on the bespectacled woman seen earlier. We see that she has had her leg caught in a foothold or leghold trap! The feet belong to a fur covered poacher who (obscurred by his bulk) breaks her neck, then dumps her over the back of an onlooking horse, which he leads away.

Third Scene; A group of women dressed in white fur clothing (presumably seal fur) are huddled together, as several males carrying iron bars, strike a number of them over the head, then dragged away as the others look on.

• Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
• World Wide Fund for Nature
• People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
• International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW)
• World Society for the Protection of Animals
• Humane Society of the United States
• American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
• Compassion in World Farming/[1]
• British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection
• Friends of the Earth
• www.harpseals.org
• Protectseals.org
• Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

www.StopTheSealHunt.com www.HarpSeals.org www.ProtectSeals.org www.Boycott-Canada.com www.SeaShepherd.org --CSOCSOCSO (talk) 16:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BUAV; [2] [[3]

WSPA; [[4]]

PETA; [[5]]

IFAW; [[6]] [[7]] [[8]]

Harpseals.org [[9]]

Protectseals.org [[10]]

FOEI [[11]]

Hello. Please cite a reliable source when adding films to the splatter film article. The article recently failed a good article review precisely because of unsourced facts, so we really don't need to more unsourced facts added to the article at this time. If you have any questions on how to cite a source or what constitutes a reliable source, feel free to leave a message on my or the articles talk page. Regards. dissolve^talk 20:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I so sorry for any accidental removal of any information in the category. I was trying to add WÄZ To the category along with Citing reliable sources taken online from the following sites www.wazthemovie.com[[12]]. Only I made a mistake and while deleting the subsequent information I ended up removing other sources by my mistakes.

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Sledgehammer (movie), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Gabriel Duvall (talk) 21:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CSOCSOCSO.

Thanks for your recent edits to the Help! I'm a Fish article. I'd just like to let you know that the Plot section has already been blanked once before for becoming too long and documenting too many details which aren't really relevant to an encyclopedic dicussion of the film. If anything, the existing plot needs to be shortened, so only the basic premise of the story is covered. Those who want more info will be able to watch the film itself. I ask you to reconsider your edits; examine the plot sections of similar films and compare the lengths. Most are a great deal more concise than the plot description for this movie. Thanks a bunch. GreyWyvern (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind, yes. It's still far from it, but there is a critical mass of detail where it will become justifiable to blank the plot description in favour of something like what appears in the blurb on the back of the DVD :( I would like to keep that from happening. Remember, you can sign your Talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~) Cheers! GreyWyvern (talk) 01:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wish to put up the following section on Freefonix regarding the main characters:COSSOCO 19:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Further Intel

BB: Her pre-teen brother B Bucky used to be a fan of opposing band The Mantyz and she despises similarities between her mother and herself being pointed out by anyone particularly by her sibling.

Mostart: Often called Cuz by Freezbone COSSOCO 19:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Could you allow me to contribute this public service announcement to your list of examples: A teenager considering purchsing crystal meth for the first time asks a dealer what it costs. Echoing his words a cut to a close up of said dealer's eye as he speculates his potential buyers fate. This followed by a nightmarish montage of events which shows this buyer losing his possessions, inhibitions, friends, sanity, health and even his life. Havingthought it over, the dealer states with a smile that it costs forty bucks, with the buyer purchasing the narcotic (with a brief scene showing his conscience screaming while shaking it's head at high speed).

COSSOCO 19:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to put the following in the article on Outbreak (film) but wasn't sure if i'll be allowed, my i please put it down?

McClintock flees, but is caught by Lt. Col. Briggs (Dale Dye), as he is dragged away at gunpoint, he promises to take Ford down with him, a threat Ford ignores. --COSSOCO 02:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there anyway of removing the number of edits on My preferences page, it's just there some contributions i'd like to remove as i now regret meddling with them altogether. Alternatively if that's not possible i'd like to log out and start again with a fresh clean slate as i did back at the end of 2007. --COSSOCO 02:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Coud someone mention that this subject is reffrenced in the motion picture, The One

The opening scenes depicting a shootout between the Irish Republican Army and the British Army and SAS in Belfast Northern Ireland is loosely based on the "Cappagh counter-ambush or The Loughgall ambush" perpetrated by the Provisional IRA East Tyrone Brigade which ambushed an SAS unit who were on their way to ambush an IRA active service unit.

Could you add the following contributions to the plot?

A centuries old, unknown colony of savage Spanish pirates, thought to have died out long ago, have survived by living on an uncharted Caribbean island. The group, largely inbred and illiterate, sustain themselves by raiding pleasure boats. Michael Caine plays a New York journalist named Blair Maynard who comes to the area with his son, Justin (Jeffrey Frank) to investigate why so many boats disappear. He and his son (on surviving a firey plane crash) are captured, but they are both kept alive due to a false assumption regarding their lineage and a need to offset the negative effects of inbreeding. Blair is used to impregnate a female (Angela Punch Mcgregor) and act as a scribe for the group, while his son is brainwashed to become one of the surrogate heirs to the pirate leader, John David Nau (David Warner).

The pirates are confronted by a US Coast Guard ship, but manage to overpower the crew and take over the vessel. Maynard sneaks aboard and, while the pirates are looting the ship, discovers a Browning .30 caliber machine gun. He uses the fully automatic weapon to kill all of the pirates bar Nau, his surrogate son and Justin. Nau orders Justin to fire but Justin can't prompting Nau's surrogate son to go for the gun leading him to be fatally shot in the head. Nau then drags Justin into the bowels of the ship whereupon Blair shoots Nau with a flare gun and save his son.

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) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Splatter film, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Juan Fernández. 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) 09:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CSOCSOCSO. 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]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ozploitation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Red Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CSOCSOCSO. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Copycat crime, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cecil Hotel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

Apologies for any offence for being lazy over this

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Father Ted characters, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Raunchy and Racy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 13:36, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CSOCSOCSO! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Ready or Not (2019 film) that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia — it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Paranoid (2000 horror film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable film with no known actors or explanation as to why this film deserves its own article.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Donaldd23 (talk) 03:27, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Try to Remember (film) 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/Try to Remember (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mvcg66b3r (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]