| Revision as of 20:42, 19 December 2011 editLhb1239 (talk | contribs)5,190 edits moar← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:45, 19 December 2011 edit undoLhb1239 (talk | contribs)5,190 edits Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Talk:Mad Men. (TW)Next edit → | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
| == December 2011 == | == December 2011 == | ||
| ] Please stop your ]. If you continue to use talk pages for ], as you did at ], you may be ]. <!-- Template:uw-chat3 --> '''Please stop replacing content to the ] that is not related to improving the article. Continuing to do so violates ] and ] as well as ] - if you persist, I will have no option but to take this again to AN/I.''' ] (]) 20:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC) | ] Please stop your ]. If you continue to use talk pages for ], as you did at ], you may be ]. <!-- Template:uw-chat3 --> '''Please stop replacing content to the ] that is not related to improving the article. Continuing to do so violates ] and ] as well as ] - if you persist, I will have no option but to take this again to AN/I.''' ] (]) 20:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC) | ||
| ] Your recent editing history at ] shows that you are in danger of breaking the ], or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. '''Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a ].''' | |||
| If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's ] to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents ] among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ]. You may still be blocked for ] even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> ] (]) 20:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:45, 19 December 2011
leave a message, the whole brevity thing.
Mad Men, smoking
Editorial discussion points.
In the article on Mad Men, there is some body text on how smoking is depicted:
- in Filming and production design
On the scenes featuring smoking, Weiner stated: "Doing this show without smoking would've been a joke. It would've been sanitary and it would've been phony." Since the actors cannot, by California law, smoke tobacco cigarettes in their workplace, they instead smoke herbal cigarettes.
- in Themes
Mad Men depicts parts of American society and culture of the 1960s, highlighting cigarette smoking, drinking, sexism, feminism, adultery, homophobia, and racism. Smoking, far more common in the United States of the 1960s than it is now, is featured throughout the series; many characters can be seen smoking several times in the course of an episode. In the pilot, representatives of Lucky Strike cigarettes come to Sterling Cooper looking for a new advertising campaign in the wake of a Reader's Digest report that smoking will lead to various health issues including lung cancer.
- On a side note, I'm not sure why this 3RR report on another User was removed without comment by outside editor. If there's any harassment here, it is by User:Lhb1239 who keeps removing legitimate discussion (on the article talkpage not in the article itself) simply because he doesn't like the topic. And his repeated claims of 'personal attacks' and 'harassment' are ridiculous. El duderino (talk) 07:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
dispute spillover
- User_talk:Malik_Shabazz#IP_harassment
- Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Hostility_over_98.92.187.224_block
- Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/98.92.187.224
Talkback
Message added 07:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Ankit Maity 07:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
December 2011
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Mad Men, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop replacing content to the Mad Men article talk page that is not related to improving the article. Continuing to do so violates WP:POINT and WP:DISRUPT as well as WP:NOTAFORUM - if you persist, I will have no option but to take this again to AN/I. Lhb1239 (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Talk:Mad Men shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.
If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Lhb1239 (talk) 20:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- ^ Matthew Weiner et al. (2007). The Making of Mad Men (Documentary). AMC.
{{cite AV media}}: Explicit use of et al. in:|authors=(help) - Cite error: The named reference
witchelwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - Cite error: The named reference
nyreviewwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - "Smoke Gets In Your Eyes". Mad Men. Season 1. Episode 1. 2007-07-19. AMC.