User talk:Rantoodle

Welcome to my talk page. Here are some tips to help you communicate with me:

Please continue any conversation on the page where it was started.
- If I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here. I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
Add or respond to an existing conversation under the existing heading.
- Indent your comment when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
- Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.
To initiate a new conversation on this page, please click on this link.
You should sign your comments. You can do this automatically by typing four tildes (~~~~).

June 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in The Return of Jafar, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. See MOS:TONE - this is an encyclopedia, not a novel. See also WP:POETIC Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Bowling is life (talk) 21:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Bowling is life (talk) 21:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete edits on a whim.

While I'm sure there can be bad actors that will provide false informations, the likelihood that the majority of them happens is very little. Yet since you arrived, you have taken a like in deleting edits on a whim solely because they are lacking a proper edit summary (without by the way giving an edit summary as to why you did so).

I agree with you that all edits should include a summary, but I'd also like to remind you about Wikipedia's consensus policy in regard to missing ones :

"Editors should not revert an otherwise good edit because of a missing or confusing edit summary; good editors may simply have forgotten, or a confusing edit summary may have been the result of an autofill mishap"

I therefore kindly ask you to refrain from continuing this behavior in the future, as is it preventing Wikipedia's growth more than aything else while also going against the website policies. Thank you in advance for your understanding. 176.134.120.239 (talk) 13:37, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My response

I saw your response to me on the Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and I want to know, how is adding the word "erection" to articles "standardizing language"? And you said you did not add the n word to articles when you clearly did here: [1]. Even your if it wasn't your intention wasn't to vandalize, it sure does come across as such by adding words like erection and the n word. Especially since you aren't explaining yourself in your edits summaries. Explaining yourself in edit summaries help other editors know what your intentions are. To me, you seemed like you were vandalizing articles to be "funny". Seriously, how are you improving these articles by adding erection, the n word, and even grammar errors like this: [2]. Bowling is life (talk) 22:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should help yourself to a dictionary, because I have not once added the n word. The diff you gave me was an error. My intent was to correct it to say “an historical”. Please try to assume good faith, thank you. Rantoodle (talk) 23:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

: I would like to add that I'm sorry for jumping the gun with reporting you. I removed the report because I'd rather see this get resolved, than it ending in someone getting blocked. I did not handle this the way I should have and I apologize for that. Please note that the previous message is nothing personal, I just wanted to know why you are making these edits. Because they can be precieved as vandalism or at least disruptive. Especially without edit summaries. I'm sorry but I don't see how these edits are supposed to improve the articles. I'll assume good faith but it's hard to when you are adding erection to articles without explaining yourself. And in the context of the content across these articles you have edited, the word erection or erected is not an improvement over built. Can you see how I or others would mistake that for vandalism when you aren't explaining what you are doing? Especially here: [3]. Bowling is life (talk) 23:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One shouldn't need a dictionary to read wiki articles, use plain well-understood words when adding content. Replacing "built" with "erected" is pointless and unnecessary, built is a well-understood word with a plain meaning. "Erected" has connotations of formality that go against the normal MOS:TONE we like to see in articles. Using "niggardly" is being deliberately provocative, it is not a word in normal usage and generally people use it to elicit a reaction based on its close sound to a taboo word. It is also an unnecessary adjective descriptor for most uses where it is generally an unsourced personal opinion about a character or person. Finally "an historic" is grammatically incorrect. Historic starts with a sounded consonant in most dialects of English so "a" is the correct article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Silver seren^C 03:19, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand what warranted this report? I’d rather you have discussed your concerns with me before escalating. I’d also point out that I haven’t done any edits since a couple other people discussed their concerns on my talk page and I committed to being more careful and conscientious of word choice going forward. Rantoodle (talk) 03:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the ANI report and I have nothing to contribute there. However you appear to be intelligent enough to read the room, so to speak, so you should have been expecting this sort of response. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Make it mac tonight" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Make it mac tonight has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 19 § Make it mac tonight until a consensus is reached. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. DMacks (talk) 13:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]