User talk:MrRingtail

Hello, MrRingtail, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to K34QB-D. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• How to avoid a conflict of interest

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:18, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete or alter legitimate talk page comments from other editors, as you did at Talk:Magnolia Pictures. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:43, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit was not vandalism. I saw nothing but unconstructive talk on that article's section, hence the blanking. MrRingtail (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two other editors before me, including an admin, disagreed with your opinion. Also you deleted the talk page header when you blanked the page. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:02, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I've noticed you reverted a helpful edit made by an IP. Please be careful when reverting IP edits, as many users sometimes assume that an IP edit is disruptive. There are many IP users who actually help the encyclopedia, so it is important to review the diffs of their edits before reverting. Thank you! NacreousPuma855 (talk) 18:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dude you're the one who's being disruptive-just watch this YouTube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?si=ZCFTBZKu_7wPUsRQ&v=PIaWqsQVVvA&feature=youtu.be

Pause on the copyright screen after the Georgia Film Office logo-you can clearly see it says "Monarch XOF, LLC is the author of this motion picture"-that tells me that Fox Entertainment Studios replaced XOF Productions and if that's not a good enough source then I don't know what is BKBJunior2000 (talk) 02:34, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually this is the link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIaWqsQVVvA

Same idea though BKBJunior2000 (talk) 02:36, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Credits are not reliable sources. Please stop doing this! MrRingtail (talk) 02:37, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forget it BKBJunior2000 (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No really, they are not reliable sources if you continue to add them, you may be blocked from editing. 98.235.155.81 (talk) 10:16, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also BKBJunior2000 as for what you said at the beginning of the section, please do not accuse someone of editing in bad faith, such behavior can sometimes be seen as a personal attack or harrassment. 98.235.155.81 (talk) 10:37, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edits you made did not have an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit and/or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

or in the visual editor:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! PhilKnight (talk) 15:43, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to Corporation for Public Broadcasting. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. guninvalid (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the website is still running, that does not change the fact that the organization is defunct. At most, this implies the ability to leave the Official Site link up. It is not appropriate to say that the organization is not defunct without significant source attribution. guninvalid (talk) 15:28, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. — Newslinger talk 10:24, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that WP:CT/CF (pseudoscience and fringe science) and WP:CT/BLP (living or recently deceased subjects of biographical content on Wikipedia articles) are also contentious topics. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 10:26, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is not appropriate to modify an admin's block notice. Don't do that again. Izno (talk) 15:55, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you reverted[1] their edit, but the content is good and matches both parent articles as a spin-off. I would recommend letting their new edits stand or at least let them know why you reverted their edits on their talk page. FutureFlowsLoveYou (talk) 18:12, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mvcg66b3r. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, WAXN-TV, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at The Wild Robot, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. R. Bardghji (talk) 19:50, 29 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be engaged in an edit war at List of programs previously broadcast by Fox. An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly revert each other's changes. Please do not revert or undo the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, use the talk page to discuss how the page can represent consensus among the editors involved. Here is some advice on how to do this. If discussions get stuck, you can request a third opinion, ask for help at a relevant noticeboard, or seek dispute resolution.

Edit warring can result in being blocked from editing, especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts within 24 hours on one page. Undoing any other editor's work, in whole or in part, involving the same or different material, is a revert. 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. Cheezknight (talk) 07:31, 2 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete or flag potential "spoilers" in Wikipedia articles, as you did in the article Citizen Vigilante. It is generally expected that the subjects of Wikipedia articles will be covered in detail, and giving a section a title such as "Plot" or "Ending" is considered sufficient warning to the reader that the text will contain revelations about the narrative. Deleting such information makes the article less useful for a reader who is specifically trying to find out more about the subject. For more information, see Wikipedia's guidelines on spoilers. Thank you. In solidarity, nil ^nz 05:13, 5 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]