User talk:Stuv3

Marnus Labuschagne

Hi. I don't quite understand your edit summary on your revert. In particular, I'm not sure that I understand why you're saying that "no one will ever overtake him"? If you're also suggesting that he will only fall, then it seems reasonable to me that the information is massively time-sensitive. Stating as a fact like that is therefore problematic and means it's almost guaranteed to be out of date within a few months - possibly even weeks. He and Smith are likely to jump around each other a bit over that period of time at least.

It's also not factually correct as written - notably the case of Andy Ganteaume of course. This list may be helpful from that perspective.

I do think that it could be written in such a way as to be acceptable - especially if it can be supported with a prose source rather than a dynamic statistical table. His career is quite short though so there's a lot of scope for wild variation in his average (see also Abid Ali (cricketer)...) compared to Smith. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Gentlemen (2019 film); that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 07:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coffee: I am not sure what to do because the two who keep reverting the changes my changes are unwilling to have a civil discussion or dispute resolution, because they think they're right. No matter my input, even if i try to reason, which i have they won't respond. And i obviously don't want to start an edit war or be blocked, so am not sure what to do.

Tennis rankings

Please do not add fictional tennis rankings to articles, as you did in Nick Kyrgios. There is no Tuesday 28 January ranking on the ATP. The last rankings are from 20 January, and the next ranking update will happen on 3 February, after the Australian Open. Tennis rankings are never updated during tournaments. Only on Mondays after tournaments. There is no such thing as "live" ranking in tennis (only live calculations, which are not rankings), and anonymous websites like live-tennis.eu (which have nothing to do with the ATP, and clearly state that, by the way) cannot be used as a source for anything on Wikipedia (please read the reliable sources guideline). You always have to follow the official ATP rankings. These are the only ATP rankings in men's tennis, there are no other ATP rankings than the official ones. Always follow the official ATP website and never use any other source for ranking updates on Wikipedia (see the WP:TENNIS guideline). Thank you.—J. M. (talk) 07:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Uncut Gems; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Bobherry Talk Edits 14:27, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Improper edit

Please don't remove sources and the captions on tables per WP:V and WP:ACCESSIBLE. Why would you want this site to be less accessible to users with disabiliites and have more unsourced information? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 251

You did the wrong fight order putting Usman-Masvidal at co-main. But I fixed it. IMAHua (talk) 04:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Stuv3 and IMAHua: , Pls do not the bout on the fight card until it is shown on UFC.com event page. Thank you. Cassiopeia^(talk)

September 2020

Your recent editing history at Tom Hawkins (footballer, born 1988) ‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that 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. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
You are edit warring an unsourced claim that he has won an award that has not been awarded yet. Meters (talk) 00:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Hello, I'm Larry Hockett. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on John Cena, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. 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! Larry Hockett (Talk) 10:46, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Holloway

Hi, Stuv3. I just wanted to explain why I reverted your edit. It was a violation of the policy for Biographies of Living People. Birthdates require reliable-source citing. Saying that "it's all over the Internet," on fan sites and other non-RS websites, is insufficient for BLP. I've looked many places and could find it on no RS website, and I'd be glad to continue searching in collaboration with you. Please note that WP:3RR doesn't apply to reversions made to BLP violations. Also, adding "Mike" to the lead is a manual-of-style violation, as per WP:MOSNICKNAME. Thank you for understanding--Tenebrae (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andrew Dominik, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Director. 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) 06:36, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Reynolds

There is an active talk page discussion on Ryan Reynolds about whether or not to include entrepreneur in the lead. Feel free to join in that discussion, but it is generally considered bad form to change something that has an active RFC going on about it. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 15:04, 4 October 2021 (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) 00:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nina Dobrev. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury • 19:22, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at stranger things, you may be blocked from editing. Uricdivine (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rick and Morty. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ––FormalDude (talk) 10:16, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Stuv3 reported by User:FormalDude (Result: ). Thank you. ––FormalDude (talk) 10:17, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Paul Dano. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. I'd strongly advise you to review WP:BRD based on the number of edit-warring notices that I see on your Talk page. DonIago (talk) 20:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:58, 5 December 2022 (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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]