User talk:A type of cabinet

A kitten for you!

Thanks

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:28, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brit Award for British Video of the Year 1990

Hello, there has been a mistake on which you undid my edits, the reason why I removed some artists from the Brit Award for British Video of the Year is because some of them are not British. On the main page for Brit Award for British Video of the Year, it says in the description and I quote, The Brit Award for British Video of the Year was an award given by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), an organisation which represents record companies and artists in the United Kingdom. And some of the artists like Tina Turner, Billy Joel, Farley Jackmaster Funk, Four Tops, Guns N' Roses, Janet Jackson, Kaoma, Neneh Cherry, Salif Keita and Prince are not from the United Kingdom and therefore, they shouldn't be in the list for Brit Award for British Video of the Year. 82.19.40.217 (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a valid reason. If this was the case, the artists wouldn't have been nominated. A type of cabinet (talk) 15:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't you read the page properly, it says The Brit Award for British Video of the Year was an award given by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), an organisation which represents record companies and artists in the United Kingdom, not artists from America, or France or Sweden, those acts from those countries shouldn't be in the list. 82.19.40.217 (talk) 15:40, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can read. Statements like that are unacceptable. Go back to the article talk page. A type of cabinet (talk) 15:45, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Thank you for your help with the IP editor who had posted on my Talk page - I really appreciated your intervention in warning the editor. Best wishes, Tacyarg (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime, buddy. Nobody should have to deal with that kind of garbage. Especially when you had done nothing wrong. A type of cabinet (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The album’s subtitle doesn’t need to be included

You reverted my edit on Bigger Than the Whole Sky saying it was an unexplained removal it was explained it is redundant to post the same information twice. What edition the song appears on is in the notes. No one has given one legit reason why it needs to be stated twice in the infobox that the song appears on the 3am Edition. It’s also inconsistency as Hits Different doesn’t post the edition it appears on and yet no one is fighting that and yet this page Would've, Could've, Should've and You're Losing Me people are fighting me on for removing redundant information and trying to keep everything consistent. Geesh! 92.1.70.84 (talk) 21:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the talk page and get consensus. You have been told this multiple times by multiple people and refuse. A type of cabinet (talk) 21:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Redundant already covers posting the same information twice, example, the fact the notes mention the edition the song is on there’s no need to include the album’s subtitle twice in the infobox. 92.1.70.84 (talk) 21:12, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should actually read that. It's not what you think. A type of cabinet (talk) 21:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did read it, and it still implies when it comes to posting repeat information in the same place. For example, If I was to put a background in an article and say “The [random subject] was released on [random date]. then a few sentences later say The [random subject] was released on [random date] and was used to do [random whatever], that would fall under WP:Redundant as it’s the same thing on the same subject and therefore the two sentences would need to be merged into one place. No different here with the subtitle in the infobox. It’s the same information and it doesn’t need to be posted twice. So one needs to go, either the subtitle or the information in the notes, as it’s unnecessary and WP:Redundant to post the same information twice in the same place. 92.1.70.84 (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, it's an essay, not a rule. Second, it's about making redundant articles, not about articles having the same information restated in multiple parts. Third, more than one person has disagreed with your opinion, so you NEED TO GET CONSENSUS. A type of cabinet (talk) 21:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And this is again why this is cyber bullying two against one and then making a threat towards someone who did nothing wrong fact of the matter is you and User:Ippantekina are the ones in the wrong as there are several pages that do not post the album’s subtitle in the infobox, and have linked to them, so I do not need to start a consensus on a common practice, what needs to happen is you two stop being bullies and look at other pages instead of telling someone they are wrong for doing what is done other pages. The fact you ignored that other pages don’t add subtitle is also evidence that you coming to my talk page and making threats was nothing but cyber bullying and intimidation tactics on your part to get your way. So my suggestion,

don’t make it obvious you’re trying to bully and intimidate someone, especially when they are in a country that has strict cyber bullying laws. Okay? 92.1.70.84 (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean look at Hits Different a GA article that doesn’t have Midnights (Lavender Edition) in the infobox and I’m the one being argued with and threatened? Lol! This is so rich! 😂😂😂 Keep it up! You two are funny being bullies and ganging up on someone for removing redundant information and keeping pages consistent. It’s adorable! 92.1.70.84 (talk) 21:41, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing legal threats will get you is blocked from editing. I would recommend that you report me to ANI if you really think you are being bullied. A type of cabinet (talk) 21:41, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure looks like I’m being bullied. I’m trying to make the pages look good and all the same and two people are ganging up on me to stop me from doing that and then making a threat on my talk page falsely accusing me of disruptive editing when the ones who are doing the disruptive editing are the ones who won’t let all the pages look the same and posting the same information twice in the same place. Anyone else looking at this would definitely say that’s cyberbullying cause why are you having an issue with someone for trying to make the pages look the same so they match a GA article? I mean really what sense does that make mate? 92.1.70.84 (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How's that working out for you? A type of cabinet (talk) 21:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]