User talk:OrdinaryOtter

re: Why would you include "images of King Kong" in the caption to an image that very clearly does not feature King Kong? —Vozhan (talk • contribs) 04:44, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. After taking a quick glance at the sources, it looks like commentators either thought that image was King Kong, or they compared it to King Kong. The caption should be changed, and perhaps the prose as well. I remember having a difficult time writing that paragraph and caption, as I was trying to present facts, interpretations and reactions accurately. You are more than welcome to try your hand at doing some re-writing based on the cited sources (and perhaps there are more sources which could be found as well). OrdinaryOtter (talk) 04:58, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

The same over-detailing you had previously removed from the article continues to be readded to the article by Madamkisha. I have already tried explaining the issue to them, but their latest response seem to show they don't intend on ceasing from readding the same detailing. Magitroopa (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. I'll restore the page for now, to remove their latest flurry of edits. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 21:35, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

I've already reverted it, but they've just attempted once more. Might need to bring this to WP:ANI if they continue with it?... Magitroopa (talk) 00:06, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I posted a very nice and polite message on their talk page. Let's give them an opportunity to respond before taking any further action. Thanks for staying on top of this. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 00:35, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Please see LeBron James talkpage: LINK. Regards.—JoeJohnson2 (talk) 04:11, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

the kamp koral debacle about stwve knowing has been debunked numerous times i would appreciate u reverted my edit of it Elibeatle (talk) 19:58, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

All content on Wikipedia is based on published sources (articles, videos, books, etc). We can't add or remove anything unless we can verify that it is true based on reliable sources.

In order for your "debunk" edits to be valid, you will need to one or more of the following:

1. For each segment of content you want removed, prove that the cited source does not state what the Wikipedia article states. In other words, whoever consulted the source made a mistake when they summarized that source in the Wikipedia article.
2. Prove that the cited sources are unreliable and therefore cannot be trusted to state the truth.
3. Provide concrete evidence, from reliable sources, that the currently cited source is mistaken. For example, if you want to claim that something has been debunked, you have to provide one or more sources that say that. Right now, in terms of the "debunk" issue, it is your word against the word of published articles on news websites. Why are you a better source of truth than a journalist who writes about these topics for a living?

For example, on the Kamp Koral page, there is a cited article which states: "Creator Stephen Hillenburg, who passed away in 2018, did not want 'SpongeBob' to have any spinoffs. A few months after his passing, one was announced."

You need to find one or more sources that contradict what that source says.

Please let me know if you have any questions. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/638535307401104/posts/1044431270144837/ Elibeatle (talk) 23:15, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

https://www.cbr.com/tom-kenny-rodger-bumpass-comfort-food-aspect-spongebob-squarepants/ Elibeatle (talk) 23:18, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for providing these sources. Often, Facebook and CBR are not considered reliable enough to use as sources, but there are exceptions. I encourage you to make a post on the talk page of each article you want to remove the "debunked" content from. Post these links, and ask other editors whether these sources are enough evidence to justify removing the content. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 00:11, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

i couldnt uploded the photo but if you look up vincent waller steve knew kamp koral u can find an image of a tweet he made saying steve knew Elibeatle (talk) 00:22, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

That would be great to mention in your talk page posts. OrdinaryOtter (talk) 02:20, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

great Elibeatle (talk) 08:05, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Hey, I saw on your edit message that you seemingly wanted me to explain why I put Mbappé's "overall presence on the pitch" as a description of why he is commonly called a “Dictator” online, and why it “fuels the meme”. Well, it’s quite abstract, but anytime he plays, his appearance and presence when playing seems to evoke that comparison in the fans who give him that colloquial nickname. So, that’s why I added that. Furthermore, I noticed you removed “…Mbappé has scored over 400 goals” and instead put “..He has scored over 400 goals”. The former is more suitable because the overuse of “He” in the lead entry is a tiny bit redundant, so it really isn’t necessary in my opinion to have changed that part, but everything else is very much justifiable. Have a great day! Yesboi544 (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Hey there!

Thanks for the polite and friendly message. Regarding the "dictator" meme, I think it would be helpful to quote a secondary source that explains why his presence fuels the meme, to make it less abstract. Regarding the lead, I personally do not feel that a continual use of "he" is redundant or repetitive in an encyclopedia article; my attitude towards this issue has been influenced by this essay. However, this is a small issue and replacing one or more instances of "he" with "Mbappé" is grammatically correct, so if you want to change it back, I will not intervene. Have a good day! OrdinaryOtter (talk) 14:25, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the polite reply! I don’t plan on changing the lead entry back, but I appreciate your willingness to not intervene! Also, next time, I will take ownership of my editing mistakes and place a source (primary or secondary) to help verify my editing statements. Thank you! Yesboi544 (talk) 18:12, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

The friendly, upbeat tone of your messages is a model that many editors could learn from. I have had some stressful encounters today, so your positive tone is a breath of fresh air. Truly, thank you. 🙏 OrdinaryOtter (talk) 00:37, 27 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I really appreciate the kind compliment and your patience. Hope you have a much better and less stressful day, and have an amazing week! Yesboi544 (talk) 00:58, 27 October 2026 (UTC)