User talk:Rolltide689

Belated welcome

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Rolltide689! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Wikipedia:Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! JustinTime55 (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Baker School of Business

The article Baker School of Business has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Insufficient independent sources to establish notability separate from its parent institution

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. ElKevbo (talk) 05:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Film plot actor names

Hi. Per WP:FILMPLOT "Do not include actors' names in the plot summary, as it is considered redundant to the "Cast" section."—please stop adding actor names to plot summaries. Thanks, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the Australia (2008 film) plot summary have been removed because they added a significant amount of unnecessary detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Also, please do not add actor names to the Plot summary if the article includes a Cast section; I see you were previously notified about this. DonIago (talk) 16:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Köppen climate classification, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York. 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) 05:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford comma

I note that you state of yourself that you are an "advocate of the Oxford comma". Please can you familiarise yourself with MOS:OXFORD and refrain from imposing it purely as a style change? Please only add it when necessary to avoid ambiguity or to maintain consistency of style in an article which otherwise already employs it throughout. Except for these instances, the absence of an Oxford comma is a valid style choice and you should not impose them purely based on your own preference.

It's not entirely the same issue but you may also find WP:ENGVAR and MOS:TIES informative. Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you continue to do this. Please stop. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And you're still at it. Stop. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:24, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above from Mutt Lunker, you should also read MOS:STYLERET. JG66 (talk) 14:59, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to The Beatles, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You have been warned above: stop this tendentious imposition of the Oxford comma and retain the style used in the article. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Stella McCartney. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Paul McCartney, you may be blocked from editing. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Stop this warring to impose your personal style preferences or expect to be blocked. This includes the imposing of your preference re MOS:NUMBER over perfectly legitimate alternatives. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you for one week for your disruptive editing, including failure to follow WP:MOS guidelines, edit-warring, and failure to respond to warnings (indeed, failure to talk at all). If when this block expires, you persist in the same behavior, you risk being blocked indefinitely. See WP:GAB for your appeal rights.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

It is evident that you have learned nothing during your enforced absence. You have resumed with vigour your campaign to impose your WP:MOS preferences over perfectly legitimate alternatives, once again particularly in regard to MOS:NUMBER and MOS:OXFORD. You know what to expect. Ping @Bbb23: as previous blocking admin.

Immediate reversion, in full, of your work of the previous few days may cut you some slack. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 13:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]