User talk:Sullay/Archive 6

Concern regarding Draft:Finnish jazz
Hello, Sullay. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Finnish jazz, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Finnish jazz


Hello, Sullay. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Finnish jazz".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Count Five members


A tag has been placed on Category:Count Five members indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Aimo Koivunen. 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: 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. TylerBurden (talk) 15:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * MOS:OVERLINK: "Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are usually not linked: The names of subjects with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar. This generally includes major examples of: countries (e.g., Japan/Japanese, Brazil/Brazilian). –Sullay (Let's talk about it) 16:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Regardless of what you think, edit warring is not acceptable and if you revert again I will report you to WP:AN3. Discuss the matter on the talk page. TylerBurden (talk) 16:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not what "I think", it's simply the rule that you apparently seem not to understand. I'm just being thoroughly honest with you. –Sullay (Let's talk about it) 16:06, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It absolutely is your personal interpretation of the manual of style, which is not a "rule". TylerBurden (talk) 16:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, edit warring is against policy, and you can be blocked for it. I find this reaction to being reverted over something as simple as a link absurd. TylerBurden (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Should I not react at all if I edit an article to adapt to the rules of Wikipedia and someone persistently reverts my edits as he personally interprets the rule in his own way? – Sullay (Let's talk about it) 16:18, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * This is beyond hypocritical, it is literally your personal interpritation vs mine, yet you think yours is somehow a "rule". And no, insults and passive aggressiveness is not a measured reaction to being reverted over a link. See WP:NPA, another policy you've broken in the last 30 minutes or so. TylerBurden (talk) 16:22, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You interpret me to be passive aggressive when I've simply tried to comprehend your logic, albeit straightforwadly. I retract the "username checks out" bit as I initially thought that you were a troll, and I apologise for that. – Sullay (Let's talk about it) 16:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, straightforwardly, that's certainly one way to put it. If you cannot handle having a civil discussion, then perhaps go and take a breath of fresh air for a bit. TylerBurden (talk) 16:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * If you get offended that easily, I likewise suggest you take a deep breath and calm down, have a cool glass of water or milk. Look, it's just a disagreement on Wikipedia; it's not the end of the world. Anyhow, I'm getting tired of this tit for tat. Christmas truce? – Sullay (Let's talk about it) 17:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not about me being offended, it's about Wikipedia policy. This isn't Twitter. I have no idea why you would assume I was a troll, it's not like you made some objective improvement to the article, you removed a link and I restored it, like you said a very minor thing not worth escalating things over. Either way I appreciate your apology and that you started discussing rather than continue reverting, we can discuss further on the talk page. Merry Christmas. TylerBurden (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)