User talk:Icedshakenespresso
June 2025
[edit]
Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. livelikemusic (TALK!) 03:10, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- What is this alluding to exactly? Icedshakenespresso (talk) 04:11, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
July 2025
[edit]
Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. livelikemusic (TALK!) 22:04, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- What is this even alluding to? I am fixing sloppy and disruptive edits from others. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hello? You are the one making disruptive edits rife with mistakes and misinformation. Make a direct claim with evidence, use the talk page, but stop messaging me with this nonsense. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 22:53, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- In this edit you removed the comma after 2024, which is in violation of MOS:DATEFORMAT, and nothing about the changes that were made were either sloppy or disruptive; you re-instated the previous edit, however, was. Not to mention, the improper use of citation formats, which is not needed in the lead, per WP:CITELEAD. And please, remain civil. Violating MOS is not nonsense, it's a warn-able offense. Wikipedia is a collaborative place. And do not accuse, either. Speak on content, not contributors. livelikemusic (TALK!) 22:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- You were literally reverting the edits in which I was correcting the misinformation that John was found dead (he was not). His place of death should be Brockton, as that is where he was found dead. Where does it say citations are not needed in the lead? Isn't it also in the rules to treat new members with understanding? You are the one accusing without giving any justification. You are re-instating misinformation on the page. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 23:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- I literally had to cite it because you kept reverting my edit that said John was found unconscious. You are clearly unfamiliar with this case. There were multiple grammatical errors in the versions you reinstated and they were obviously not being proofread. Go back and look since you are trying to point fingers. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 23:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- In this edit you removed the comma after 2024, which is in violation of MOS:DATEFORMAT, and nothing about the changes that were made were either sloppy or disruptive; you re-instated the previous edit, however, was. Not to mention, the improper use of citation formats, which is not needed in the lead, per WP:CITELEAD. And please, remain civil. Violating MOS is not nonsense, it's a warn-able offense. Wikipedia is a collaborative place. And do not accuse, either. Speak on content, not contributors. livelikemusic (TALK!) 22:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- Again, I explained here the [valid] reasons for warnings. And while not relevant, I am very aware of this case (having followed since the beginning). But again, speak on content not contributors. Also, I made one revert, not multiple, so your [false] and also not assumption of good faith reasonings of you kept reverting my edit and You are clearly unfamiliar with this case. are not only false, but very accusatory, as well. And if you felt the revert was not proper, you either go to the article's talk page, or go to that user's and ask something along the lines of: "Hey, can you explain why you reverted my edit(s)? I don't understand why." livelikemusic (TALK!) 23:12, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- I am clearly a new user but instead of being helpful you're being extremely rude and gave zero explanation for the passive-aggressive messages you sent, even when I asked. I am quite obviously not the one who added citations in the in lead, I was just following suit. You are singling me out and bullying me for some bizarre reason. I am obviously trying to CONTRIBUTE to Wikipedia and none of my edits were vandalism. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 03:54, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Why don't I get that assumption of good faith? You started immediately threatening me when I edited the page to make it factual. I'm not sure how taking issue with your treatment of me is attacking the contributor when this entire back-and-forth is explicitly about content. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 04:11, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Again, I explained here the [valid] reasons for warnings. And while not relevant, I am very aware of this case (having followed since the beginning). But again, speak on content not contributors. Also, I made one revert, not multiple, so your [false] and also not assumption of good faith reasonings of you kept reverting my edit and You are clearly unfamiliar with this case. are not only false, but very accusatory, as well. And if you felt the revert was not proper, you either go to the article's talk page, or go to that user's and ask something along the lines of: "Hey, can you explain why you reverted my edit(s)? I don't understand why." livelikemusic (TALK!) 23:12, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- I am not singling you out, nor did I threaten you; I apologise if you've felt that way (via the automated, auto-leveled templates Wikipedia allows us to use), but that is not at all what I've done. But once again: you need to speak on content, not contributor. Not once have I talked about you, but your edits I have. There is nothing personal in this where I am concerned. Making statements, such as You are clearly unfamiliar with this case, you're being extremely rude, You are singling me out and bullying me for some bizarre reason is where you are speaking on contributor, not content. You asked What is this even alluding to? and I explained in this edit why the warning was issued, regarding the Manual of Style of dates. livelikemusic (TALK!) 04:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- I have not once talked about you either, only your conduct towards me.
- You sent me a talk message in June. I literally did not know which page or edit you were referring to, and offered no clarification when asked.
- You sent me another talk message. My edits remedying grammatical errors and misinformation were reverted and you accused me of vandalism.
- I literally did nothing wrong. You can inform a new user of things they aren't aware of without jumping to extremes. Wikipedia literally says to "be bold". Is this the type of treatment that is supposed to help a user learn and want to continue contributing? Icedshakenespresso (talk) 04:41, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- I have not once talked about you either, only your conduct towards me.
- I am not singling you out, nor did I threaten you; I apologise if you've felt that way (via the automated, auto-leveled templates Wikipedia allows us to use), but that is not at all what I've done. But once again: you need to speak on content, not contributor. Not once have I talked about you, but your edits I have. There is nothing personal in this where I am concerned. Making statements, such as You are clearly unfamiliar with this case, you're being extremely rude, You are singling me out and bullying me for some bizarre reason is where you are speaking on contributor, not content. You asked What is this even alluding to? and I explained in this edit why the warning was issued, regarding the Manual of Style of dates. livelikemusic (TALK!) 04:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
Six Flags Qiddiya City moved to draftspace
[edit]Thanks for your contributions to Six Flags Qiddiya City. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. hekatlys ✉ 21:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hello. Sorry, I am a newer user and wasn't sure how to save an article in progress. Thank you for helping. Icedshakenespresso (talk) 02:24, 20 October 2025 (UTC)