User talk:Morton Thiokol

Welcome!
Hello, Morton Thiokol, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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

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.

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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! DemocraticLuntz (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Model codes
Please join the discussion at Talk:Toyota_Hilux.  Stepho  talk 13:35, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

DS Alert
Your recent editing at Chanel Miller and People v. Turner is non-neutral and unacceptable. The above notice is to inform you that Discretionary Sanctions are in effect for any page related to gender-based disputes and controversies. If you persist in this type of editing, you may face sanctions including topic bans or blocks at my or any other admin's discretion. -- Laser brain  (talk)  01:43, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect (duh)
Incorrect. It is absolutely neutral to state the facts that 1) Turner was found guilty by jury and 2) he first entered the public eye as a suspect while Miller first entered the public eye as a purported victim. Morton Thiokol (talk) 13:19, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:Laser brain has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. —— SN  54129  13:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Please note that according to the guidelines surrounding the sanctions state "Any editor who issues alerts disruptively may be sanctioned." You are advised not to place them on pages of people who are not involved in editing the articles in question. - SchroCat (talk) 13:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Stop edit warring. Your efforts are disruptive and unless you cease straight away, you face the possibility of being blocked. Your grasp of grammar is too limited, and only based on a narrow interpretation of English. There are a wide range of styles in English, and only one insists on a colon before a quote or list. not that I needed to check, but both A Dictionary of Modern English Usage and The Complete Plain Words both back up what I'm saying. You need to stop being disruptive and accept that there is more than one way of doing this, and WP:STATUS QUO advises you leave it alone until you bother to discuss this on the talk page. - SchroCat (talk) 02:32, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Use the talk page or I'll dump you in one of the Administrators notice boards. See WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD and use the talk page to discuss the fact you,can't grasp the fact there is more than one way of writing this, and the form of English on the page is not one that uses the moronic colon. - SchroCat (talk) 02:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring warning
Your recent editing history 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&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - SchroCat (talk) 02:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. SchroCat (talk) 03:14, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello Morton Thiokol. You may still have a chance to avoid a block for edit warring if you are willing to undo your last change to Mercedes-Benz OM601 engine. Admins tend to follow the rules, which would imply a block of your account. (This would still happen even if you are correct). Style matters are very debatable, and you are not entitled to force your own version into the article by reverting. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 05:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

>"Style matters are very debatable, and you are not entitled to force your own version into the article by reverting." But grammatical rules are not debatable. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morton Thiokol (talk • contribs)
 * You just don't understand it, do you? This isn't a point on which there is a single interpretation: there is more than one way to do it and the version before your edit warring was grammatically correct and was consistent in using one stylistic form throughout. I'm sorry if this is beyond your levels of comprehension, but if you can't get it into your skull that there are other ways of doing things than the way you are trying to force, then your time here will include blocks, disputes and your eventual ending as being too disruptive for the good of the encyclopaedia. - SchroCat (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Clearly you are the one who does not understand. When it comes to grammatical rules of punctuation preceding an enumerated list there IS only one way to do it: a colon. This is why you are unable to provide any support for your fallacious claim that a comma is acceptable. Also, it is pretty pathetic (and false) to mischaracterize my disagreement with your false claim, as an inability to comprehend. Wikipedia is a place of information, not false statements and ego defense, Schrocat.