User talk:InfiniteNexus/Archive 2023

This is an archive of past discussions with User:InfiniteNexus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Listen, I understand about the Skydance Task Force but i wanna learn more about Skydance and it's culture. There's so much work to be done and no one hasn't doesn't done at least a single thing for Skydance since trying to split Skydance Television into a page. Everyone in the Wikipedia is doing their part but the WF rules are bothering me through and through. I wanna build this task force since the wikiproject failed and putting it in Animation was a nice choice. Building it up for other wikiprojects is gonna be more harder than i through. I'm sorry about the mess I caused and i just wanted to make Skydance noticeable. Not to mention getting it on the templates of Wikiproject Film and Wikiproject Animation is hard since of the request thing. Any thoughts about the task force and please don't be too negative on me. It really makes me sad and nervous. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 23:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@BMA-Nation2020: I understand and appreciate your enthusiasm, but you have to do things the right way. I'll elaborate over there, you don't need to apologize. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

thank you, man. i started liking Skydance since Geostorm and Luck. Luck was the only thing i got so interested in learning Skydance cause of it's strange history and it's knack from Skydance Sports to Skydance Television. I wanted to make a wikiproject like them but a user told me to start a task force. So i did that and build it up as a work group for Skydance sections. Each Skydance part is divvied into 5 groups. Normal which is films and shorts, Animation, Gaming, Sports, and Television. I put it in Animation since it's a good start to make the task force. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 00:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

That's a nice idea for sure, but WikiProjects and taskforces only work if there are enough editors willing to commit to collaborative work in the same area of interest. Based on the lack of response to the talk page posts you made the other day, I'm afraid there likely isn't enough editors interested to make a taskforce feasible. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

i'm sorry about the talk page. I didn't know i need more people. I thought 3 would be enough. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 00:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, it's okay to make mistakes, we're all learning here. Let's keep the discussion centralized at the taskforce talk page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Right. But how would I make a task force for three people? I need about 6 more to get this up and running. I know recruiting some is not your style but what else do I need to do to get some editors like Skydance? I noticed there's a few Skydance editors working on the films but they are just all released. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Like I said, let's keep the discussion centralized over there. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

k BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 01:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I managed to move it to WikiProject Film. but it will take a while for it to be proposed by. or whatever i need to do to make it happen. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 04:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't follow. How does moving the taskforce page from WikiProject Animation to Film address my concerns of a lack of consensus and participants? InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

i don't know. you told me that in the talk page. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 04:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

No I didn't. You asked me whether the taskforce's parent WikiProject is WikiProject Film or WikiProject Animation, and I told you it would fit in WikiProject Film more even though it was technically part of WikiProject Animation. And then you moved it to WikiProject Film. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:15, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

whoops. i'm so sorry, man. i was wondering if you can fix it for me but... i'm not good at making this task force or anything. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 04:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, you sound a little lost, so let me clarify. You need to start a discussion, either at WT:FILM or WT:ANIMATION, to see whether enough editors are interested in joining a hypothetical Skydance taskforce. If so, it's all good, but if not, there is no good reason for there to be a taskforce. You shouldn't have jumped the gun and created the taskforce before testing the waters to see if editors are interested. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:22, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

okay, okay, i think i got it now. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 04:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

There! Here it is! As you told me, too. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 04:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

you checked the link i sent you? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes. It hasn't been 24 hours, but the continued lack of response should give you an idea of how much support there is for the creation of a taskforce. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:56, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I have to wait 24 hours for them to respond for my task force? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 20:05, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

No, I'm saying it's too early to draw a conclusion, but things aren't looking good so far. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:14, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

How do i make it better?! I'm trying so hard and i got nothing! What am i missing!? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 20:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Skydance Task Force isn't a discussion, it is a notification of a discussion occurring elsewhere. As for how long it takes - it won't be hours or even days, consensus (if there is one) to create a taskforce will take weeks (if not months) to form. Remember: there is no deadline. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 20:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

i get it there is no dateline. but any example of making a discussion for a task force like Skydance? Like from any task force in the wiki? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 20:36, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Redrose64, they're referring to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Skydance Task Force 2. The section heading is duplicated. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

i knew i forgot something. But still no response to wait 24 hours. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 21:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I saw that you reverted my changes twice of the Pixel 6 und Pro dimensions. I understand, that you only referencing to the offical dimensions of the spec sheet, but so did I. Both - the dimensions in inch and in mm - are in the spec sheet, but as I wrote: those in inch are way off, what results in an error of over 6mm in the height. It does not makes much sense to insist on one side of the official specs if they are wrong.

Regards, Markus LoRDxRaVeN (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@LoRDxRaVeN: The dimensions in inches were being automatically converted to millimeters, but it looks like the automatic conversion was a little off. I've adjusted the code to render the same output, but using millimeters to convert to inches instead of the other way around. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

That looks like a decent compromise. Thumbs up. LoRDxRaVeN (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Oppenheimer (film) 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; read about 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. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 22:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jauerback: WP:DTTR. I am well aware of Wikipedia's policies on edit-warring and 3RR, which I have not violated. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

---

Your recent editing history at Jack Champion 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; read about 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. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 05:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0: My goodness, has no one heard of WP:DTTR? I have reverted once thus far, how is that remotely edit-warring? If we're counting, you have now reverted twice. Posting frivolous talk page warnings on other users' talk pages is not a good tactic to resolve disputes. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Read up on WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD and WP:CONSENSUS. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 05:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I can recite those pages backwards. I sincerely hope posting frivolous warnings like this one is not a habit of yours, this behavior is borderline disruptive/uncivil. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Instead of reciting them backwards, follow them instead, and stop making personal attacks. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 05:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

STATUSQUO and BRD are essays that have no binding force, and I fully intend to further discuss the matter on the article talk page. But it is not a requirement by any means to go directly to the talk page if reverted, that's called WP:1RR and only applies to certain articles. I have made no personal attacks, please read WP:WIAPA and refrain from making false accusations, which is considered uncivil. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Once again, stop with the personal attacks. Repeatedly calling someone uncivil for no good reason goes against WP:GOODFAITH and is considered an attack. Read WP:AVOIDYOU and focus on the article and gain WP:CONSENSUS for the changes you propose. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 05:57, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Pointing out uncivil behavior is not a personal attack, nor uncivil behavior. Again, please read WP:WIAPA. I assumed good faith when I reverted your edit (for the one and only time), assuming you would either (a) concede, or (b) revert, in which case I would take it to the talk page per BRD. And yet you reverted ... and slapped a 3RR warning on my talk page even though I had reverted once and you reverted twice?! And then when I try to point this out to you, you make unfounded claims that I made "personal attacks" and was uncivil? This behavior is very concerning, and the fact that you still believe your actions were appropriate is even more concerning. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:05, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

The fact that your talk page is slapped with multiple disputes and warnings is what is concerning. Please concentrate on improving the encyclopaedia instead of moral signalling and making unrequited comments on people's personalities. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:13, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

The only other warning has been the one directly above this, and similar to this case, I did not violate 3RR. The admin who posted that warning later voiced support for my position on the talk page discussion, and the dispute was resolved. As for the other disputes, the primary purpose of user talks pages is literally to resolve disputes, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. And do you still not understand that posting a 3RR warning was not the appropriate course of action? InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, (talk page stalker) here. Where exactly are the multiple disputes and warnings? I've checked on the last four archives and I've found no warnings related to disruptive editing and/or behavior concerns that aren't in this very thread. It would also be helpful for the discussion if Krimuk2.0 cited exactly which comment they perceive as a personal attack, because it's not evident which one they're referring to. —El Millo (talk) 06:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I am sorry for the 3RR template bomb. That was my mistake. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate the apology. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I was expecting an apology for your repeated unrequited comments on my personality & behaviour, but then, we can't have it all, can we? :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

My comments about how posting frivolous warnings and making false NPA accusations is uncivil were correct and justified, and calling out uncivil behavior is not uncivil, nor considered a personal attack (which has a very specific definition on Wikipedia). I won't lecture you further, but I won't retract my previous statements either. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Haha, absolutely not surprising. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding reason. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Knives Out#Comedy_Genre".The discussion is about the topic Knives Out.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Doobledoop (talk) 20:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I have a question for you.Highwatermark1 (talk) 11:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Are you there?Highwatermark1 (talk) 19:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Fire away. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:14, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

You correctly said the "task force" which isn't really a task force for Skydance and animation at all, is operating ad hoc and outside of both the guidelines and rules for Wikipedia.Highwatermark1 (talk) 07:05, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Those weren't exactly my words, but go on? I'm not sure what you're trying to ask. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I see based on Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Minions: The Rise of Gru that you appear to be involved in some kind of drama with BMA-Nation2020 and LancedSoul. If there is a content dispute, please discuss with them on the talk page of the articles involved. If it's their behavior you're concerned with, I would advise taking it to their talk pages, and then ANI if all else fails. BMA-Nation2020 is already involved in an ANI thread, but this seems to be an unrelated matter. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Those two are editing in a wrong fashion. The "task force" while well-intentioned is not operational. DRN was no help.Highwatermark1 (talk) 07:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

DRN is only for content disputes, not editor behavior. Have you tried talking it out with them on their talk pages? InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Not a chance. Besides one or more of them being autistic, they are making several mistakes. We're not talking about a few, dozens.Highwatermark1 (talk) 07:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:COMMUNICATION is required. If you are truly unwilling to engage with them, you may consider filing a report at WP:ANI, but please be aware your edits will also be scrutinized. I strongly advise starting a discussion on LancedSoul's talk page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

If you would like to try talking to those two, then do it. I have no plans to talk to them.Highwatermark1 (talk) 08:15, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

You may strongly advise starting for discussion on me, but I discovered that this user is actually using inaccurate/incorrect edit summary for one words. Like this for example. Also, I am considering semi-retired from Wikipedia as I'm busy for doing work outside of Wikipedia, unless if I found a reliable source. LancedSoul (talk) 11:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware. I left them a message on their talk page asking them about their edit summaries, but they removed the notice without responding. Though I'm not sure if using weird/inaccurate edit summaries qualifies as disruptive behavior. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Given the discussion on your talk page, you might be interested in this discussion. Highwatermark1 has directly stated that they are unwilling to talk it out with BMA-Nation2020 or LancedSoul on their talk pages. @Redrose64: You might be interested as well. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm a bit behind the times and don't trust my ability to ping you, so you get a talk page message. You mentioned that the support/oppose/discussion format you were drafting would've been far superior to what we've got going on. I was thinking the same, plus we should do something to keep people replying to question #2 and any & all questions to come thinking that's where to weigh in on the main issue. So what's stopping us from reorganizing the RfC going on now into a support/oppose/discussion format? It's a bit of work, but I could do it. --Kizor 17:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, we could do that, though it's going to take some time for us to sort all the comments into support/oppose/other. There's a discussion about splitting off to a separate page at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)#Move Vector RFC to subpage?. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:22, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes the S/O/D format is definitely preferable in terms of a future closer determining consensus and just wading through all this junk. Happy to help if needed. I don't think we should let the perfect be the enemy of the good. A reorg can happen now even if a move is later determined to be the right call. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 19:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Done. Checking my work now. Since you left a "support" and a "comment" at the same time, I didn't recognize they were from the same user, moved the second part into the "RfC discussion" subsection, and after noticing just now that they were, copied your signature from the second part into the first to give it proper attribution and am now letting you know and asking if this was appropriate or if you want the issue handled differently. --Kizor 22:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kizor: Thanks for taking care of that. I'm fine with splitting my comment into two. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

My oppose !vote was deleted during the reorganization. Please check carefully for other deletions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm trying to go through the page history to see what exactly Kizor did, but it's taking me a while. I'm not sure what's going on with the comment placed before "Discussion". InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, for reference, this is the version of the talk page before the reorganization. I'm going to check if Kizor missed anything. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I've gone through the entire discussion (everything above "Question #2"). There weren't any other deleted comments, but I did reorder a few and made minor formatting changes to a couple of them. Going to execute the split after checking in at the talk page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed that you recently changed the formatting of something from beginning with #: to beginning with ::. As a heads up, this sort of edit will break the formatting by preventing the ordered list from counting all of the responses. Is there a particular reason that you chose to make this change? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:44, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm going through the entire discussion to see if Kizor missed anything (see the above section), so I didn't realize you had made those edits. Thanks for fixing it. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:46, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

You reverted my edit on December 2 at 6:34. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

The sentence in question says:

In the film, the Avengers fight Ultron, an artificial intelligence accidentally created by Tony Stark (Downey) and Bruce Banner (Ruffalo) with the goal of causing human extinction.

It seems to me that many readers wouldn't know which had the goal of causing human extinction, Ultron or the Avengers.

How about this?

In the film, the Avengers fight Ultron, an artificial intelligence accidentally created by Tony Stark (Downey) and Bruce Banner (Ruffalo). Ultron has the goal of causing human extinction.

Or this:

In the film, the Avengers fight Ultron, who is an artificial intelligence accidentally created by Tony Stark (Downey) and Bruce Banner (Ruffalo) with the goal of causing human extinction.

-RoyGoldsmith (talk) 09:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@RoyGoldsmith: I don't think there's any ambiguity. There is no comma before with, so it is clear that with the goal of causing human extinction is part of the appositive phrase an artificial intelligence accidentally created by Tony Stark (Downey) and Bruce Banner (Ruffalo) with the goal of causing human extinction. Only if there is a comma before with would the sentence read In the film, the Avengers fight Ultron [...] with the goal of causing human extinction. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree, technically. Grammatically, not having a comma makes the whole latter part of the sentence (after "Avengers fight Ultron") a dependent clause. However, I said "many readers wouldn't know which had the goal...". I think that most readers will be confused with the length of the clause and the fact that it's got compound and parenthesized objects (Tony and Bruce).

Because of this, I'm going to put in the second of my changes ("who is"). That's grammatically correct as well. If you wish to revert my change, be my guest and I'll never bother you again. -RoyGoldsmith (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

​ I'm fine with that wording, but it sounds a little off. What if we replace the comma after "Ultron" with an em dash? Would that address your concern? InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

​How about replacing the whole ", who is " with an em dash, like this "the Avengers fight Ultron—an artificial intelligence accidentally..."?

You can edit it to "the Avengers fight Ultron—who is an artificial intelligence accidentally..." or anything else you want. -RoyGoldsmith (talk) 09:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting that move. I had considered reverting it myself, but held off. I don't blame the user who posted the request to RM/TR, as they are fairly new. However, I don't understand why it was moved, apparently without checking the articles' talk pages for previous move requests. As page mover, if someone had asked me to make a technical move, which does happened occasionally, that's the first thing I do. BilCat (talk) 21:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree, I just spoke with the user (admin!) who made the move and told them the same things you wrote above. Great minds think alike! I was very concerned when I saw it was an admin who made the move, so I figured I would need to talk to them one-on-one. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for speaking to them. I was considering doing that also. You'd think an admin would know better, but everyone makes mistakes or has lapses. BilCat (talk) 21:52, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, we're only human. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:King Kong (TV series), 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 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) 17:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Time Variance Authority (Marvel Cinematic Universe) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 1 § Time Variance Authority (Marvel Cinematic Universe) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:18, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I'm pretty sure I got this right on the downcasing of expanded acronyms of common-nouns. The MOS is tricky, so I'm always open to raising my game on it. My vibe is that Wikipedia is a low case place. Additionally, I just trimmed out the text that tells our reader that the term is an acronym. A nugget in the MOS chides us not to point out acronyms to our readers. Okay, trying to avoid drama and edit warring. Please research it and school me why these are proper instead of common-nouns. We all learn from each other. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 05:23, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@WikiWikiWayne: No, that's not correct. Language Model for Dialogue Applications is a proper noun, not a common noun. In other words, it is a proprietary, copyrighted brand name, not a generic term. In the examples listed at MOS:EXPABBR, digital scanning is a generic term (common noun), so it should be in lowercase, but British Broadcasting Corporation is a brand name (proper noun), so it should be in uppercase. You are correct that Wikipedia is a low case place when it comes to article and section titles, but we follow standard grammar conventions as well. That includes capitalizing proper nouns and not capitalizing common nouns. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Hi, again. See: MOS:ACRO1STUSE for simplistic examples and rationale. For example, the WP:MOS expansion of MTU is maximum transmission unit, not Maximum Transmission Unit. It's common nouns. Please school me on why this common-noun acronym should be Title Cased. Also, please see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations#Formation and usage for "It is not necessary to state that an acronym is an acronym. Our readers should not be browbeaten with the obvious." That is why I blanked the cruft, "stands for..." - Cheers! - {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 06:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Again, this is not a common noun, it is a proper noun. Please refer to the dictionary definition of "proper noun". Maximum transmission unit is a common noun. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:31, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello. This is not a right or wrong issue. There have been acres of discussions about discrete italics within image captions and resulting in no consensus. I prefer it. Calling me wrong for doing it is not friendly. Reverting it is not friendly. I edit in good faith and to improve the encyclopedia. Please try not to make it personal. Thanks. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 00:47, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

WikiWikiWayne, I recognize your edit was made in good faith, and I was not trying to "make it personal". I described your use of italics as "improper" because nowhere on MOS:ITALICS does it say italics can or should be used for this purpose. If you believe I am mistaken, please let me know. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Can you please move my article back to the main space? The series has wrapped filming per https://www.small-screen.co.uk/john-wick-prequel-series-has-finished-shooting/ .. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 05:05, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Also from Mel Gibson @ https://wegotthiscovered.com/tv/john-wick-prequel-series-the-continental-has-finished-shooting/ ScienceAdvisor (talk) 05:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@ScienceAdvisor: Afraid not. Neither Small Screen and We Got This Covered are considered reliable, so we would need to await confirmation from a reliable source that confirms filming has begun. Also, when I made the move this morning, I had a brain fart and forgot that Draft:The Continental (miniseries) already existed. Please merge your content over to that page, thanks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:38, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Did you look for other sources? Seems to me if you googled before moving the page you would have found them.. Also, the article quotes the star of the show saying filming was finished. In this particular case, that seems sufficient and could certainly be backed up by other sources. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 05:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

https://www.praguereporter.com/home/2022/5/24/mel-gibson-takes-a-stroll-through-central-prague-following-budapest-shoot/ ScienceAdvisor (talk) 05:49, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I did, I couldn't find any reliable sources, and the article at that time had no sources that indicated filming had begun. See WP:BURDEN, the onus is on you to prove that the series has begun filming. As for Mel Gibson, We Got This Covered does not include the actual quote (just the paraphrased version), and even if they did we still wouldn't be able to use it unless another RS indepedently verifies the report. You can see how We Got This Covered is of poor quality with this report, they're saying that Mel Gibson has finished shooting his portion of the series, and that apparently means the entire series has wrapped filming? This is one of the reasons why they can't be trusted. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:50, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't seem reliable. Their About page has no evidence of editorial oversight, and their social media accounts are not verified. You can find a list of reliable film sources at WP:FILMRS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus How about Deadline?? https://deadline.com/2022/12/project-artemis-adds-trio-to-cast-1235203717/ ScienceAdvisor (talk) 05:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

That's exactly what we needed. Please add the source to Draft:The Continental (miniseries), and I'll move the page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:59, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@InfiniteNexus That is a different version that has substantially less editorial content than the page you removed.. I would appreciate it if you would restore the page that was there before that people had begun working on.. It shouldnt have been moved since just checking the news for the show under IMDB is how I easily came across the source. The show only needed to begin filming so I am not sure why you were arguing about the show having been wrapped. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 06:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Several things:

• The convention is to use the draft that was created the earliest. If you had looked at The Continental (miniseries)The Continental (miniseries), you would have seen a warning not to create an article because a draft already exists at Draft:The Continental (miniseries). Sadly, because Draft:The Continental (upcoming TV series) did not exist, no warning appeared when you turned The Continental (upcoming TV series) into an article. As I wrote earlier, please merge (combine) the content on The Continental (2023 TV series) onto Draft:The Continental (miniseries), and then we can move that to the mainspace.
• My move earlier today was in accordance with WP:V, WP:ONUS, and WP:NFTV. In order for the article to exist in the mainspace, there would have to be evidence from reliable sources on the article that confirmed the start of filming, but at that time no sources saying that were present on the article. It was not my responsibility to look for sources, per WP:BURDEN. Now I thank you for finding that Deadline source, but without that source the draft could not have stayed in the mainspace.
• My comment about We Got This Covered incorrectly summarizing that the show has wrapped filming was to demonstrate that the site is not reliable. Also note that your initial comment at the top of this thread says Can you please move my article back to the main space? The series has wrapped filming.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

We can sit here and play wikipedia attorneys and argue principals established on several different articles including that articles shouldnt be deleted for lack of citations if they are available.. There are several others. if you are going to just come in, remove articles under false pretense with no research and then switch them out for inferior versions.. I dont think i want credit for the participation.. I find this distasteful and the fact you are arguing your position instead of admitting the show finished production almost a year ago and the article was fine the way it was is irritating. I hope in the future you will be more aware before you recklessly edit. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 07:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

​Again, the onus was on you, not me, to prove that the series had begun filming. When I saw that this redirect was turned into an article, I looked for sources on the article that indicated filming had begun, and found none. So I made a quick Google search, but could not find any sources either at first glance. So I moved the page to draftspace because there was no evidence NFTV had been met. I don't believe that course of action was improper or unjustified.

Now you have provided a source that confirms filming has begun, so I have moved the article back to the mainspace. The matter should now be resolved, with the only outstanding issue being the duplicate drafts, which I have invited you to remedy by merging your content onto the live article. If there is anything else you need clarified, please let me know. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I dont really know why you are continuing this line of thought.. You moved the article w/o doing any research.. I left a message on the talk page for the article saying it had moved into production and that is why I had published the article. If you had any manners, you would have asked on the talk section before removing the page. Instead of admitting that you made a mistake, you decided to make it personal and restore a different version of the article. You did this not once, but twice. All that was required was that filming had to begin. I was giving your sources that showed filming had finished and you decided in the face of overwhelming evidence to try and defend yourself by refuting my sources and refusing to do a google search. Someone who seems to have as much experience as you editing articles about film should have been able to confirm production had started instead of turning this into whatever this is.. Please stop with this conversation and stop contacting me.. I removed the page from list of pages so .. Im done with it.. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 18:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@ScienceAdvisor: I'm sorry you think that, but you are misconstruing my actions. I have explained several times why I made the move, why it was up to you and not me to prove that filming had begun, and why the old draft should be the prime copy of the article. At this point, it's becoming an WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT situation, where you are repeating unfounded claims that I moved the page to draftspace because I "don't have manners" and "decided to make it personal". Finally, please be aware that on Wikipedia, collaboration is essential and conflicts are inevitable, you must be willing to engage in civil discourse in order to contribute constructively. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:59, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

• Production had started so I created a page. Actually, production had finished 8 months ago ..
• I created a talk page, I left that info on the talk page.
• You deleted the page and said there was no evidence that production had started
• Once you deleted the page I showed you the Amazon announcement that showed they had added it to the upfront announcement which should have been enough, but you didnt like that even though it specifically states on WP:NFTV that is acceptable.
• I gave you two sources directly quoting the star of the show saying production had wrapped but you didnt like them and didnt do even a google search yourself again.
• Once I found the deadline article, I republished the article and you removed it again.
• You then published a lesser version of the article from draft which incorrectly lists the show as a mini-series. There is no evidence that this show will not have a second season and is limited to 3 episodes.
• Now you are making false accusations.. If wikipedia is a collaborative platform, why would someone with the entire MCU and DCEU release schedule not leave a note on the talk page and ask where I had seen that production had started instead of moving the draft? This isnt a hard subject, a simple google search provided me with several results and IMDB aggregates every news story and publishes it on their page.
• You keep saying the burden was on me to prove that the information existed, that isnt the case. Wikipedia routinely puts emphasis on the fact that a page should not be deleted simply because information wasn't cited if it is available. If you are going to impose your will on a subject matter, take responsibility and create the article and move the information yourself. You invalidated hours of work for no justifiable reason and then asked me to help improve an article I dont even see as published correctly but you have imposed your will such that I couldnt do anything about it if I wanted to.. ScienceAdvisor (talk) 19:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Until you found the Deadline (or Amazon) source, there was no evidence on the article that filming had begun. In other words, the article did not include a source that says filming has begun, all we had was your word. Your writing on the talk page that filming had begun and the two unreliable sources with Mel Gibson's "quote" were not acceptable evidence that filming had begun; per WP:VNT, we needed actual, reliable sources. That is why I restored the redirect. When you found the Deadline article, I immediately asked you to merge the content you wrote to the draft that already existed, per wiki convention. You declined, instead asking me to restore your version. I'm not sure why you would prefer that to merging your content to the older draft, which multiple editors were already working on.

As for collaboration, I left a note on your talk page so you could have a chance to respond. Collaboration does not restrict to discussing prior to taking action. Our discussion was productive and I assumed the matter was resolved once you found the Deadline source, but you instead declared that I was "making it personal" and asked that I restore your draft. You express frustration at your "hours of work" being "invalidated", and yet you refuse to integrate your work into the live article. May I ask why that is? InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Please discuss your recent changes at the Talk Page of Arrival; specifically those re: MoS changes of character names from surname to first names, which is against convention. Please do not revert back before a discussion has been held; see also EDIT WAR and BRD. Thank you, GenQuest ^"scribble" 06:27, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@GenQuest: Yes, I was typing on the article's talk page as you posted this. Though please also note that WP:BRD is an essay and has no binding force; the only guideline that must be followed is WP:3RR. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I was reverting an edit on Google Chrome, but there are conflicts so I reverted your edit first. This does not mean I disagree with you edit, I just prefer automated reverts. Thanks for your contributions! Kidonng (talk) 12:25, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha, no worries. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:58, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Pixelbook (2nd generation), 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 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) 21:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Damn American English! adamstom97 (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Haha. I know, it can be tricky! InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Film series introduced in 2023 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!} 02:34, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I had recently made the edit to Scream VI characters & didn't list an source but I got my info from hellosidney.com, precisely this right here which listed their names. Hope this helps! https://hellosidney.com/scream6/ 2603:8080:73F0:7150:6139:4AEF:4554:5E0D (talk) 02:53, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Fansites aren't considered reliable sources, especially blogs run by a single person. If you can find a reliable source that supports those character names, then you can submit an edit request. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Why are you so weird about this? Barack Obama's Wikipedia page lists no sources for his date of birth - why don't you remove his birthdate? Jack Champion's birthdate is confirmed on both iMDB and on his verified Instagram page. Your weird power-trip about this is really, really difficult to understand. 174.101.226.57 (talk) 21:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Barack Obama's date of birth is sourced in the first sentence of the article's body; Champion's is not. Per WP:BURDEN, it is the responsibility of an editor who wishes to add certain material to an article to cite a reliable source, not merely by asserting that something is true in the edit summary or by vaguely mentioning a "source" without actually linking to it. IMDb is not considered a reliable source, while the Instagram post you cited shows a timestamp of November 17 and not the 16th. Please find a reliable, preferably third-party source that confirms his date of birth, or else it cannot be added to the article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you removed the link to Google Maps from the Wicked: Part One page, and I am wondering why. Your edit summary was "cleanup" and so I'm wondering why it was "dirty". Thanks! Rick21784 (talk) 17:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Rick21784: Hello. Firstly, external links are not permitted in article bodies. Secondly, Google Maps is not suitable as a source for things like filming developments, so a third-party, reliable source would be needed in this case. And finally, the fact that a set is being built is a trivial detail that is already implied by the previous sentence (outdoor filming would occur at a site being developed at Ivinghoe Turf), so I don't feel this information is noteworthy for inclusion. Hope this helps! InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:28, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Society of Explorers and Adventurers (film), 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 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) 05:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello I am wondering why you reverted my edit on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timoth%C3%A9e_Chalamet&oldid=prev&diff=1144988813&markasread=275789578&markasreadwiki=enwiki you didn't provide a summary. Putitonamap98 (talk) 17:10, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

@Putitonamap98: I did. WP:OVERLINK. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Can you use the official grasshopper announcement as the source? https://support.grasshopper.app/t/grasshopper-is-shutting-down-on-june-15-2023/61994/1 New hordak from 2018 (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC) New hordak from 2018 (talk) 20:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@New hordak from 2018: We could, but third-party sources are generally preferred on Wikipedia. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

What is your opinion on the reputation of this source ? New hordak from 2018 (talk) 22:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

It is not considered reliable. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

What does "c/e" stand for on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by New hordak from 2018 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

It stands for copyediting. You can check out Wikipedia:Glossary and Wikipedia:Edit summary legend for a full list of Wiki jargon. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, definitely should have mentioned why I changed the width of the colours table on Pixel 6. The table makes it so there's a massive gap between texts, since its wider than the infobox. Causes a massive white space. The other option is to make the table vertical, but I myself couldn't figure out how, I'd assume you would since you seem pretty good with tables. Thanks. commemorative (talk) 09:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@Commemorative1: Yeah, that's another casualty of the terrible Vector 2022 interface, which the community has been trying to have rolled back for months. If all goes to plan, unlimited text width should become the default in a matter of weeks, so this will not be a problem soon. In the meantime, you can click the button on the bottom right corner or switch back to Vector legacy (recommended) in Special:Preferences. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm a bit iffy on Vector 2022. I think it has some benefits. I'd switch back to the old theme but I'm not sure if the 2017 wikitext editor works on Vector.

Hopefully we see that change. commemorative (talk) 02:38, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I've used the 2017 wikitext editor before, it does work on Vector legacy. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Come on! —¿philoserf? (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Before removing anything from a page on Wikipedia, whether it be content, or references, or even categories, you must have a valid justification. I'm not aware of any guideline, or even essay, that says drafts should not be assessed. Is that not correct? InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Actually an editor only needs his or her judgement. The rest is gravy. Go to it. Trust your judgement. Time will tell. I have reasons and I included them in my revert. Even in your second revert, no justification was given. You claim I need a reason and provided none. What you demand of others you might also expect of yourself. —¿philoserf? (talk) 18:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

While WP:CRV is an essay, and template parameters aren't content, it sums it up: Unexplained content removal (UCR) occurs when the reason is not obvious; the edit is then open to being promptly reverted. I had no idea why you would remove the assessment tags from the draft, so I reverted. When the reason given was "unnecessary", I asked whether there was a guideline or essay stating so. I ask you again: is there consensus that drafts should not be assessed? Because if so, I have a ton of drafts on my watchlist whose talk pages need to be stripped of their tags. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Note: You reverted twice. Whether you understand the meaning of my edit summary is irrelevant. You double reverted and you gave no edit summary reason. I do not need to further justify myself. Please, continue to edit and try to be consistent. If you demand something of others also expect it of yourself. Have a good day. —¿philoserf? (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Philoserf, I believe you are mistaken. I clearly explained my revert in my second revert. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

There we are. I am mistaken. Have a good day. —¿philoserf? (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I tried to create an entry for Jiang Li, but it reverted to a redirect. Hyju (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you want me to add you as a co-nominator for the Infinity Stones GAN since you've been one of the other top contributors to the article in terms of edit count? -- ZooBlazer^talk 18:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Nah, that's fine. The 4.3% content I've added to the article is nothing compared to your 64.2% (great work on the overhaul and copyediting, by the way!), plus I will likely not be available to help with responding to the GA review anyway. I appreciate you thinking of me! InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Once Thanos' review was done I decided to work on articles related to him. I'm hoping to get Thanos, the Blip, and the Stones as a good topic, and then maybe eventually a featured topic someday. -- ZooBlazer^talk 00:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, I wish you luck on your quest. Godspeed! InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:15, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello InfiniteNexus, should I leave a link from the official marvel twitter page or something from James Gunn for Nathan Fillion? 144.86.13.154 (talk) 20:09, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I've added in a third-party source. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi InfiniteNexus. Sorry I didn't catch on to what you did. I didn't understand what you were doing. I still don't know exactly what you want to go into the article. Can you sort it out for me?Chjoaygame (talk) 07:58, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I was making a minor wording change to the hidden notes in the article. Which portion of my edit do you need clarifying? InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok, this is over my depth. I don't need you to do anything. Sorry I meddled.Chjoaygame (talk) 06:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Dear InfiniteNexus,

I have seen that you reverted my addition of pricing on the Pixel a series and I have read the rules you linked to. However, after reading them, I don't see that I violated said rules in any respect. I'll cover them how I saw them:

"An article should not include product pricing or availability information (which can vary widely with time and location) unless there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention, which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention."

This mentions pricing and availability together. The smartphone template has a separate section for availability by region. Because of that, it is used in many smartphone articles. And if availability is relevant enough to get its own section in the template, I don't see why the same would not be true for pricing. I also think that the MSRP of a phone is very relevant because in the competitive phone market, the price has a big impact on whether a phone sells well or not. And as I mentioned in my edit summary, the price is a big selling point of the Pixel a series. It is the most differentiating feature from the standard Pixel and Pixel Pro series.

"Wikipedia is not a price comparison service to compare prices and availability of competing products or a single product from different vendors."

This also mentions price but is not related to the edit because it does not compare the price with competing phones, nor does it list prices from 3rd party resellers.

Maybe it was too much text to write it in a separate section. I already drew the parallels to the availability. An alternative I'd like to propose is to add the MSRP to the template. It is an aspect, so to say a spec, that every phone has, and a very important one at that, as I have outlined. That's why I think it's a good idea to have a place where this information can be put.

Regards, Punkt64 (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Punkt64: Hello. Articles on consumer products generally do not and should not mention its MSRP unless, as WP:NOTPRICE puts it, there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention, which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention (bolding my own). This is why there is no |price= field in the smartphone infobox, since price info is not noteworthy for most smartphones. While I agree that the low price is one of the main selling points of the Pixel A-series, it has not met the "commentary beyond passing mentions and in product reviews" criterion of NOTPRICE. In fact, you cited the official Google Store in your edits, which is not an independent, third-party source as NOTPRICE stipulates. The low price is noted in the articles through other means, such as mid-range variants in the lead. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello @InfiniteNexus, thank you for your reply. While I'm personally of a different opinion on the relevance of price (for example, while the iPhone 14 is advertised as an upgrade from the iPhone 13, multiple sources have claimed that the iPhone 13 outsold the iPhone 14 since its release by a large margin), I understand that I have to comply with the established rules. I also understand that the Google Store as a source is conflicting with these rules. My following remarks will be about the Pixel 3a series. An independent source for this is the popular phone website GSMArena.com. https://www.gsmarena.com/google_pixel_3a_and_3a_xl_unveiled_with_snapdragon_670-news-36932.php This mentions the price in the title. "Google Pixel 3a and 3a XL unveiled: same cameras, slower chipsets and $399 starting price" This website only puts the in their view most noteworthy facts about a phone announcement in the title. For example, this article https://www.gsmarena.com/the_xiaomi_13_ultra_official_with_four_cameras_and_a_variable_aperture_main_lens-news-58285.php has aspects in the title that are different from the price. Moreover, GSMArena.com provides commentary on the price by saying "They can be considered as spiritual successors to the affordable Nexus series, which were the Google phones before the Pixels came to be.", referencing a difference in pricing structure between the Nexus-line and the Pixel-line up until this point. They also compare and discuss what in their view are the most striking differences to the previous Pixel phones. "With a more affordable price tag and the same rear cameras, the new Pixel 3a and 3a XL aim to reach wider audiences." This includes the price.

When handled this way, there is

- an independent source: GSMArena.com

- and encyclopedic significance: price as one of the main selling points of the phone

- which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews): the mentioned source is a mainstream media source and is not a product review (because it is the commentary on the announcement, not the review)

- provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention: the price is in the title and the text and is referenced and discussed at the start of the source.

For those reasons, I'd suggest to add the launch price of the Pixel 3a to the Wikipedia article about the phone with the provided source for reference. Punkt64 (talk) 17:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

​I'd be more comfortable if we had a more reliable source than GSMArena, but you're welcome to add it back in and see if anyone else objects. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

There's also arstechnica quoting similar things. I'll add that as a second source then. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/05/googles-cheaper-pixel-3a-is-official-starting-at-399/ Then there is The Verge but I personally rate them lower than GSMArena because of things like clickbait, which GSMArena usually does not. https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/7/18527206/google-pixel-3a-xl-phone-announcement-price-release-date-io-2019 Punkt64 (talk) 18:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The Verge and Ars Technica are actually considered high-quality reliable sources on Wikipedia. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay thank you, then I will add the article from The Verge as well. Maybe I also confused their reliability with a different website. Punkt64 (talk) 11:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you think this is worth adding? Looks like Marvel got its own Ezra Miller. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I think we can probably add a sentence or two describing Marvel's reaction to the scandal (not every detail about the scandal itself). InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Details have been added to Draft:Avengers: The Kang Dynasty with info from that source and this new one from today. Trailblazer101 (talk) 23:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Trail! InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I moved the Shogun Reavers bit of Shogun Warriors (comics) as I couldn't see anything at all to connect it to the Shogun Warriors beyond being Marvel mecha. I instead moved it to List of Marvel Comics teams and organizations#Shogun Reavers. If it does belong on the Shogun Warriors page it needs a lot more context to explain why. Thanks! =) BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:20, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

No problem! My fault for forgetting to leave edit summaries =) BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Don't sweat it. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Made by Google, 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 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) 09:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Made by Google".

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. When 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!} 00:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Google messaging apps".

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. When 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!} 06:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Please stop adding trivia about how something was stylized. This is lead clutter. Almost all big budget films have images of their film posters, so people don't really need to be told that there's a slightly different capitalization on the poster. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: I must say, I'm a little ticked off by your tone here. The phrasing of your comment appears to imply that I have engaged in chronic, disruptive behavior on a large number of pages, when in fact all I did was swing by a handful of pages (about films in the same series) and modify their leads. Firstly, I disagree with your assessment that this information is cruft. MOS:TITLE#Typographic effects and MOS:TMSTYLE both make it clear that the inclusion of such notes is permissible, and I don't see any harm in including it either. Secondly, the stylization in this case is not, in fact, apparent from the poster, only on official websites and social media. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: As an administrator, you should know better than anyone that communication is required. I wasn't expecting an immediate "fine, have it your way", but a reply would be appreciated. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

You can start a discussion on the talk page, start an RFC, etc. I don't think that trivia about capitalization is important enough to belong in the opening sentence of a film. Now, please stop pinging me. I've got more important things to deal with. If you ping me repeatedly, I'll just mute your pings. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:13, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Wow. Okay then. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:30, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Good evening InfiniteNexus, this is a random question but I hope that you (with you experience) can help me out :). It is about the article Fall (2022 film).

Jeffrey Dean Morgan plays the character 'James Conner', but the characters last name is frequently adapted on Wikipedia to Connor because multiple 'sources' such as IMDb and RadioTimes use the wrong last name. They are often mistaken because the character's daughter her lastname is Connor, but she bears the name of her newly married husband. So people on wikipedia keep changing the name, while the end credits of the movie clearly say "James Conner".

So now finally my question haha; the good name (James Conner) is literally in the end credits of the movie (just checked it on Netflix), but i can't find a source of this literal end credit scene that confirms this name. And the sources that I find, such as IMDb & RadioTimes, use the wrong last name which isn't used in the endcredit. What can I do or add, so people won't keep changing it back to the wrong last name?

Hopefully you can help me. Greetings from the Netherlands RuedNL2 (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Greetings. If that is what the credits say, you can add a hidden note explaining this and asking editors not to change the spelling. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this good tip, I added a hidden note immediately! RuedNL2 (talk) 16:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Glad I could help. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:36, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Why did you re-add the Film Draft notice? The movie is already out in theaters.-Prince Silversaddle (talk) 03:25, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

 Removed. Thank you for letting me know. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:54, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. BattleshipMan (talk) 13:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Hullo, Infinite. I noticed that for every DIsney+ series, there is always a Wikipedia editor who informs of a date given in an international version of Disney+. Shouldn't it be better if there is a hidden note telling the editors that only US-based dates will go for American series releasing on Disney+? JEDIMASTER2008 (talk) 00:57, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

@JEDIMASTER2008: If there is a particular article that experiences this issue a lot, it may be a good idea to use hidden notes there, but it would be overkill/unnecessary to do that for all Disney+ series. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Alright, for a particular series only. JEDIMASTER2008 (talk) 06:01, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you, InfiniteNexus, for your significant contribution to Google-related articles. Elominius (talk) 08:40, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

@Elominius: Why, thank you! InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

I started a table on my sandbox for video game franchises and potential colors we can use for them, if the color parameter is kept pending the result of that discussion on the Infobox character template. I wonder if you think this table could be helpful as far as establishing some colors to use in a consistent manner on infoboxes (similar to this module). This smashbros.com page might also be useful in determining colors for this for other franchises. Soulbust (talk) 06:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

@Soulbust: Yes, that should indeed be helpful. Though I should note that for video games, someone in the discussion said that there is consensus among WikiProject VG not to use colors on their articles, so even if the discussion ends with colors being kept, I don't know if that would mean there is consensus to use colors on video game articles specifically. That would be a separate discussion among the members of WikiProject VG. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Could you add a poster to the My Adventures with Superman article. I don’t know how and I don’t wait to mess up the article. If you go to the article’s talk page, there’s a link to the poster. Jstewart2007 (talk) 22:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jstewart2007: You can upload the file at Special:Upload. In the Summary field, copy-and-paste the gray box at {{Non-free use rationale poster}} and fill it out. If you still need help, you can check out WP:FFU. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I am still figuring things out. Jstewart2007 (talk) 00:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Anytime. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Why did you do that? Why did yu rebersed my editings on the specific page? Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου (talk) 19:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

@Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου: Because as I noted in my edit summary, WP:CAPFRAG dictates that periods should not be used in image captions if it is a sentence fragment. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey, Infinite. The info on the reason the name is used for a particular episode of a particular TV series is too trivial, isn't it? JEDIMASTER2008 (talk) 03:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

@JEDIMASTER2008: If there are reliable secondary sources discussing that, then it may be noteworthy to include it in the article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:23, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

In reply to the following email sent to me by @Cxwong:

Hi,

In the "Plot" section of "The Flash (film)" article, I notice you remove the post-credits scene notes. How come?

Thanks, cxwong

Because the post-credits scene is a trivial joke scene that isn't important or essential to understanding the plot. Per WP:FILMPLOT, we decide whether to include post-credits scenes the same way we decide whether to include every other scene. If The Flash's post-credits scene happened in the middle of the film, we wouldn't have included it either. (P.S. in the future, please try to keep inquries like this on-wiki if possible, unless dealing with a sensitive matter. Thank you.) InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:33, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I reread your comment at WT:MCU and I'm *insanely* jealous you're going to hopefully get to see it! I won't be able to get out there before it closes (and I really hope they extend it), so I had to find the videos online (also in part to make my edits). I loved it so much, especially being a theater fan myself. Honestly I'm bummed too I'll miss out on getting any sort of merch for it too. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm excited to see it too, sorry to hear you won't be able to make it! InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:33, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

If you're able to take some photos, that would be really great! At least of the marquee on the Hyperion. The commons image we have now is okay, but it'd be great to be a bit closer/different angle. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:28, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

I'll try to get several good shots so we can pick and choose (and maybe add a link to {{Commons}}). I've never actually uploaded to Commons before, but I'll try to figure that out. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

That'd be great! They have an upload wizard, so it's fairly straight forward, especially if it's your own work. And I've done some work there so if you get what you can added to it, I can always go in afterwards and fine tune the info. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93: Just got back from Disneyland. Enjoy: [1]! InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Those are amazing shots Infinite! Thanks so much for taking them! I hope you liked the show. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Seconded, great photos Infinite. Very jealous. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both! Yes, the show was awesome and I had a great time. It's a pity that neither of you get to experience it live. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi InfiniteNexus,I'm Qorvos.With all due respect, sir, I understand that you are a veteran contributor, and you have many pages created as some of your achievements.I'm not trying to antagonise you in any way. In fact, I only just joined some months ago.I am a huge fan of the same things that you are a fan of, and this is why I've reached out to you like this.I would request you to retain the post-credit scene, as the inexistence of Aquaman and later existence is significant, as he is one of the primary cornerstones of the DCEU, regardless of the delivery of the scene and its overt comedy. Please try to be understanding, and don't take this the wrong way, I'm just trying to help, and maybe be of use to our millions of users who have no ability of editing and creating pages, and the simple fact that we both love The Flash and saw it on the biggest screens we could find.Thank You. Qorvos (talk) 00:42, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@Qorvos: Thank you for reaching out. That Aquaman is one of the primary cornerstones of the DCEU does not demonstrate how the scene is important to understanding the film's plot. It is wiki policy, per WP:FILMPLOT, not to include any scenes played solely for laughs, such as this one. If you believe an exception should be granted, you should discuss on the article's talk page to obtain WP:CONSENSUS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Come to think of it, you are correct.It is said that Flash undoes his changes to the timeline,including that.Repeating such a statement would be repetition.I'm sorry,this is one of my very first pages, and I greatly appreciate your guidance.Thank You. Qorvos (talk) 11:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

I would like to apologise for my unprofessional behaviour and the lack of understanding of Wikipedia's rules of contribution. I hate a vandalised page, and it is my responsibility to call out vandals and recognise when I've done so myself.I hope this does not alter your opinion of me.If it's not too much to ask, a reply from you to demonstrate our resolution of this will be appreciated.Thank You. Qorvos (talk) 11:44, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@Qorvos: I appreciate it, but you do not need to apologize. I recognize that your edits were made in good faith and not vandalism, and your messages on my talk page have been civil and cordial. I'm glad the situation with The Flash's plot summary has been resolved; however, you are always welcome to make further comments on the talk page if you wish to do so in the future. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2023 UFO sightings, 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 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) 07:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey, congrats on making it into a Kotaku article as the person who nominated Barbenheimer for deletion! -- ZooBlazer^talk 02:10, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

... yay, I guess? Still kinda sour over how that turned out. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

I felt like that at first, but I must be corrupted now because I'm fully embracing it now. -- ZooBlazer^talk 02:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Template:A Quiet Place, 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 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) 20:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2023 UFO sightings".

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. When 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!} 06:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Can someone please make the links "G'iah (Marvel Cinematic Universe)" and "Varra (Marvel Cinematic Universe)" because then it wouldn't undercut the character biographies between original comic and MCU versions as well as people like you instantly changing what I did thirty minutes in one keystroke. 13 August 2023 - 69.121.183.150 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.183.150 (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Gonnym and I have explained in detail to you why the undisambiguated redirects should point to the MCU versions and why MCU-disambiguated redirects are not needed. Readers can still find information about the comics characters via hatnotes on the MCU characters list. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

There very, very often is a comma after e.g. Either style is permissible so it generally should not be changed willy-nilly per MOS:STYLEVAR. That's just inviting a "style war", especially if you do nothing but that kind of WP:MEATBOT change of removing the comma without doing anything genuinely constructive in the article. It triggers people's watchlists and is apt to irritate them, for no objectively defensible reason. Just a word to the wise. (I actually usually prefer it without the comma myself, but it really depends on the sentence structure.) PS: I've seen some writers (mostly on self-published style blogs and user-written Web forums) claim that a comma after e.g. or i.e. "is American" and that lack of one "is British", but there is no published actual data to back up such a claim that I've ever been able to find. Thus a MOS:ENGVAR-based rationale for going around changing it en masse is not likely to fly.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I was reverting an edit, not making it. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Talk:Rebel Moon 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; read about 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. Linkin Prankster (talk) 06:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay, it has become clear to me that there is a WP:CIR issue here. For the record, I reverted twice — in accordance with policy. (Also, there's a WP:DTTR template at the top of the page ...) InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

You don't have to revert four or even three times. If your behaviour is suspicious for intent on continuing edit war then you can be warned. I won't revert again either anyway. Linkin Prankster (talk) 07:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

suspicious for intent on continuing edit war Yeah ... no. I stopped reverting once it became clear you wouldn't stop and that there were CIR issues. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't know whether you're going to revert again or not within a few minutes of you revrting a second time and me warning you. You stated that you didn't intend on reverting again only after my warning. Linkin Prankster (talk) 09:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Ihave started a move proposal to seek a consensus, hope there's no problem in it. Linkin Prankster (talk) 07:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

I have an alternate proposal. Let's remove the Part One: A Child on Fire title as an alternative title for Rebel Moon and make the article about both films/parts for now. After all the second film is just a plain continuation written together and was even shot back-to-back. If the second part warrants its own article after release, we can separate it from Rebel Moon like Dune and Dune: Part Two. Linkin Prankster (talk) 07:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

That would be a highly unconventional arrangement that would require substantial discussion among the article's editors. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

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

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. When 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!} 04:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Template:A Quiet Place".

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. When 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!} 19:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. Thank you for your work on Potential acquisition of Disney by Apple. User:Tails Wx, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good work on the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Tails Wx}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Tails Wx 13:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi InfiniteNexus, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

@Extraordinary Writ: Thanks! InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

I've been undoing some of your miscapitalization tags like this one since the title has an embedded title that seems like it needs to start with a capital letter, even if it start with "The" or "A". Most sources cap these in that context. Dicklyon (talk) 03:35, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Could you please clarify? What do you mean by "embedded title"? Words like a and the are always uncapitalized in titles of works, unless if it's the first word of the title, the last word of the title, or after a colon or en dash. See MOS:TITLECAPS. There are no exceptions unless special consensus is obtained through discussion (for example, with the Star Trek Into Darkness incident). InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

See this image where "A Pony Tale" is clearly an embedded title (they're not all that clear, but I think treating the pattern as embedded titles makes the most sense). Embedded titles are discussed briefly at MOS:THETITLE. Dicklyon (talk) 00:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I believe that's not correct. The "embedded title" MOS:THETITLE talks about is referring to titles of works "embedded" in another title of a work. It gives the example of An Examination of The Americans, in which case The Americans is a TV show being quoted by the chapter title. & Her Sisters in a Pony Tail is a subtitle, which follows the rules of WP:TITLECAPS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Could be. Maybe we need a new discussion at WT:MOSCAPS. Dicklyon (talk) 03:13, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that would be necessary, this is a pretty straightforward case of TITLECAPS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:33, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Never mind, I see you've already started a thread. No matter, I'll add my comments there. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:35, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Also, I see you're an AWB user. I was doing a lot of JWB, but recently had that right revoked due to some mistakes. I had been working through Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations, usually editing the links to miscapitalized redirects, but sometimes just taking our that miscap tag as with the Barbies. There are some pretty easy targets there for someone with AWB (which I'm told is more powerful than JWB in terms of being able to prevent false positives). You interested in taking on some of those? Dicklyon (talk) 03:40, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I can take a look, but I am pretty busy in real life these days, so I can't guarantee I'll be able to stay on top of this. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

No problem, but think of this if you're looking for work at some point. Dicklyon (talk) 00:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

You have often been using suppress-redirect without a valid reason under WP:PMRC. For example, among your last 50 moves, [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] do not appear to meet any of the criteria for redirect-supression/speedy-deletion. (If you believe any of those did satisfy a CSD, please let me know which.) In the future, please limit your use of suppress-redirect to situations where the redirect would be eligible for speedy deletion. Please also indicate which criterion you are relying on (other than in the case of round-robin swaps) with the use of an appropriate edit summary. (You should really provide a reason whenever you move a page other than, say, a user page.) SilverLocust 💬 08:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for raising your concerns with me. The purpose of leaving behind a redirect after a move is to prevent broken links and avoid disruption to users. Before suppressing a redirect, I take great care to ensure neither happens: the redirects suppressed are never former names of an article (i.e. a {{R from move}}), and usually have 0–5 incoming links and insubstantial pageviews. Prior to moving the page, I ensure that all incoming links have been corrected, and that the move itself is uncontroversial or trivial (in other words, housekeeping). Redirects in the draftspace are almost never useful and never used, so it would be WP:COSTLY to keep them. It is important to remember that IAR and BOLD advise us not to blindly stick to the rules to the letter, and it is permissible to use editorial discretion in these scenarios — which are, again, uncontroversial and non-disruptive housekeeping tasks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Well now you know that someone does object to using your advanced permissions to suppress/delete redirects that would not be eligible for a speedy deletion. As to redirects from draftspace, see WP:RDRAFT and the RfC in the footnote. Your view that these are unnecessary is evidently not shared by the community. (I for one find them useful and WP:CHEAP.) I also don't see a need to delete various other redirects like List of Hawkeye (2021 TV series) episodes (where you used two moves to delete the redirect properly left by another pagemover, which did create a broken link at List of Hawkeye episodes). If you are not willing to limit your use of pagemover permissions to within the bounds of WP:PMR/WP:CSD, I would request revocation per WP:PMRR#3. SilverLocust 💬 09:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

I was obviously unaware of RDRAFT (and I oppose the non-guideline essay blurb which inaccurately summarizes the cited RfC), but I will keep that and your other concerns in mind when moving a page in the future. However, I will note that most of my draftspace-to-mainspace moves involved drafts fully authored by me, with no other contributors, so the draftspace redirects would have fallen under G7 anyway. As such, I will continue not to retain those redirects (whether through redirect suppression or by manual G7 tagging) so long as CSD allows me to. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

You're right, of course, about the ones fully authored by you. I didn't consider G7 after noting that they wouldn't be R2's. I've struck out two of the examples. Thanks. SilverLocust 💬 19:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi. It seems to me that you had the intent of reporting an IP here. As you can see, the IP claimed to have an "account", but changed the subject and didn't respond to User:MikeAllen's comment too. I was wondering if you had actually reported them. They are back on Oppenheimer (film) this time. ภץאคгöร 07:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

I did not report them, because there was no 3RR violation — their fourth edit was narrowly outside the 24-hour window. I am aware of the dispute on Oppenheimer (film) but have not been following it; if they continue to edit disruptively, I would suggest taking it to ANI. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:36, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Why is a consensus needed for an RfC? _{Duly signed,} ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:45, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Because this is not your typical RfC — this change could literally affect millions of editors. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Fair point; I understand. I won't contest your closure. _{Duly signed,} ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 19:13, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Downtown West (Google), 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 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) 01:01, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Please edit this to be a neutral notification. Otherwise it is WP:CANVASSing. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:06, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Which part specifically do you find problematic? It's all factual statements: the proposal directly violates one of our project-wide guidelines, and at least one editor is questioning the legitimacy of said guideline. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Ugh, dude, the point of neutral notifications is to be like, this discussion is happening, check it out, full stop. Editors can decide to visit it without any particularly encouraged prompting. Your prejudicial framing violates WP:CANVASS. Just simplify the notice. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:49, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

See WP:CANVASS#Campaigning, "Campaigning is an attempt to sway the person reading the message, conveyed through the use of tone, wording, or intent. While this may be appropriate as part of a specific individual discussion, it is inappropriate to canvass with such messages." Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I still don't find it non-neutral, but ... if you say so. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Just want to alert you that there are three other articles titled E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, in case you want a different example for that exact wording. Station1 (talk) 01:14, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It took me a while, but I found a better example. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:36, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus! You've reviewed some of my edit requests for Wheely and possibly other articles, which I appreciate. I was wondering if you might be willing to review a request I've submitted at Talk:Helmy Eltoukhy, which I think is a bit more complicated than what is usually achieved using Template:Edit COI for editor review.

On the Talk page, I've outlined how the Helmy Eltoukhy article essentially covers three topics. I've saved draft entries for Guardant Health and AmirAli Talasaz at Draft:Guardant Health and Draft:AmirAli Talasaz, respectively. You'll notice Guardant Health currently redirects to Helmy Eltoukhy, and AmirAli Talasaz has no article despite having a very similar career trajectory.

I'm seeking editor feedback on the three pages, with the goal of having the two draft pages moved into the main space and Eltoukhy's entry trimmed appropriately. I should note, I am proposing these changes on behalf of Guardant Health, and I've disclosed my conflict of interest on all three Talk pages involved. I'd appreciate any feedback, if you're interested, otherwise I'll consider some WikiProjects to reach out to for help. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

@Inkian Jason: Thank you for reaching out. If you would like to have a draft article published to the mainspace, you'll need to submit it to AfC and have an editor who specializes in reviewing new articles accept or decline it. I see you've already done so with Draft:GroupM, so you're already familiar with the AfC process. You should not attempt to ask specific editors to look at your drafts as a means to bypass the AfC process, which I see you are encountering some problems with. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I am familiar with AfC, but wasn't sure if the three articles being related complicated things. I also wanted to give editors who have worked on Helmy Eltoukhy an opportunity to provide feedback. I'll go the AfC route, starting with the company article and an AfC comment that attempts to summarize what I've posted at Talk:Helmy Eltoukhy. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

AMC is the would distributor of Taylor Swifts Tour!!!!! Sbara2222 (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

It looks like we've got a WP:SOCKFARM here. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:25, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I see that you reverted my changes in the Google Pixel Comparison page, and you tagged it as inappropriate resizing !! With one simple look you can easily see that Not only my resizings are Not inappropriate, But also they made the table more readable and nice-looking ! All I did was to make a reasonable proportion between the words and their occupied spaces ! Can you please explain for me that Why you called my editings inappropriate ?! Bezyjoon (talk) 22:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello. It is not appropriate for editors to manually and arbitrarily adjust the font size of text, as noted by MOS:FONTSIZE. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Paris Has Fallen, 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 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) 01:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Untitled Tomb Raider film, 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 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) 01:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gattaca (TV series), 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 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) 01:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Please change your closing outcome to include "Not moved" to conform with the Requested moves closing instructions. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

RMs and XfDs are not limited to the three default outcomes. They are the most common, but certainly not required. The {{Old moves}} template at the top of the page can still categorize the result as "not moved". InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I wanted to message you regarding your edit here. I don't think it's appropriate for you to speculate so much on my intentions. I made that edit a few days ago, about 3 or 4 now, and have admitted I let my frustration get the better of me. I would like to note that just today was my attention was drawn towards the principle of commenting on material, not behavior, and that is why I thought editing it would set a more productive tone for future discussion in the thread, as I believe is my right under wiki policy. I considered it needlessly malicious in the edit reason as I had made an accusation about a user's intentions much in the same way that you are now about mine. I'm going to reinstate my edit one final time, but I want to be clear that I am not hiding anything. I am going to be sharing a hyperlink to the edit on the noticeboard so that it is exceedingly clear that I am taking ownership of it and exercising my right to amend my edit for the sake of a more fruitful discussion. ChimaFan12 (talk) 01:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I don't understand why you are reverting the Google Tensor G3 edits.

all frequencies on every programm give the one I put. But you are reverting based on a random specs which is supported by no facts. I really would like to understand Qhyron90 (talk) 12:05, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I have only reverted your edit once, the other reverts were performed by an IP user. I suggest you take up the matter with them on the talk page, where a discussion is currently ongoing and another user has voiced similar concerns. As there has yet to be consensus on what to do, the WP:STATUSQUO remains with the current (sourced) information tagged appropriately. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I removed the red link to fictional town from Jerusalem's Lot (Stephen King) without checking the article history, and later noticed my edit was tagged as a manual revert, which led me to your explanation that fictional city has been recreated as a redirect. I don't know if you meant to make fictional town a redirect as well, or if your restoring the link to it was a mistake. Since it's not an issue that I'm particularly interested in, I figured I would just draw your attention to it and let you know that I will not oppose your reverting my edit if that is part of your solution. Martin IIIa (talk) 02:12, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@Martin IIIa: Thank you for letting me know. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

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

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. When 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!} 00:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "King Kong".

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. When 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!} 00:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Society of Explorers and Adventurers".

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. When 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!} 00:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, InfiniteNexus. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Big Tech rivalries, 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 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) 04:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

What exactly was the intent behind Category:Unreleased products? There is already Category:Cancelled projects. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 05:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: An unreleased product may not have been officially canceled. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, happy to meet you. I work for SoFi, an online personal finance company, and have a declared COI. I am turning to you because I see that you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies/Participants and that you also have an interest in technology, so perhaps you would like to look at an edit request I recently posted at Talk:SoFi#History_edits. If you think my suggestions improve the article, I would appreciate if you could implement them. Thanks so much. Rachelatsofi (talk) 21:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

@Rachelatsofi: I will take a look. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

In light of what is currently occurring on the page I feel I must clarify that this edit [2] is not meant to be sarcastic, that is actually a great idea and I didn't know that page existed. Not sure what is going on there now but will be disengaging until such a time as I figure out what that dude is playing at. Thank you Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

There is way to much sarcasm on that talk page, that's for sure. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

No matter who you agree with, please stop. If you were being sarcastic, you are being WP:POINTy. If you were being genuine, then your comments are really bizarre, and I would suspect WP:CIR issues. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:14, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I think you're bordering on indirect WP:PA here, so I'm suggesting you don't go much further with your current line of inquiry to avoid any further insults (that may have already been caused). I wasn't being sarcastic, so not pointyness. I was being genuine that I thought @Horse Eye's Back was suddenly 100% correct about everything, and therefore this insults said user's WP:CIR to say otherwise. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. I too am baffled at what the other user is trying to do. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:14, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Maybe try & put an end to a dead-end discussion? Looks like it worked. WP:SARC CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I kept trying to figure out why that had turned into such a confusing brawl and the more I look at it the more I think that CommunityNotesContributor was *never* editing in good faith and they were messing with people from the beginning (they wrote the convoluted and contradictory OPs in both discussions) and kept poking and prodding at each junction to make the fire burn brighter and hotter. I've never had a discussion go as bad as the one around Twitter has gone in my whole wikipedia career, only in hindsight do I realize that perhaps that wasn't by accident. I apologize for getting frustrated with you, this was probably a discussion I should have avoided. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Please read projection, as you're now blaming me for your WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. You believe I have an almost perfect batting record, I am almost never wrong. The only way to seemingly end the pointless bickering was for me to change my opinion - which I'm entitled to do and appears to have worked for now - over your WP:DISRUPTIVE editing that quickly turned into WP:NOTGETTINGIT. It was obvious you were never going to WP:LISTEN, so I thought I might as well just agree with you instead. "If you can't beat em join em".

I have no doubt this raises questions about my WP:COMPETENCE, and rightly so, as I easily give up arguing in pointless discussions, and therefore my opinion shouldn't be trusted in arguments where a user is consistently being disruptive and not actively listening to anyone.

I was always clear from the start that I supported Option D, however at no point did I support a split prior to consensus being reached. I even made it clear I felt it lacked notable support, so please do not misrepresent my opinions on the matter. Is it possible the reason you've never had a discussion go as bad as this is because you've never engaged in such a controversial and contentious split??

But of course, you are almost never wrong. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 16:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

So, you were being sarcastic. This is not appropriate and even more disruptive than Horse Eye's wikilawyering. I too disagree with them, but you don't see me being sarcastic or needlessly dramatic. Please stop doing this and take the steps necessary to remedy your actions, starting with the removal of this POINTy message on your user page. If this behavior persists, I will have to involve an administrator. (Pinging @Slatersteven so they are aware of this discussion.) InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:14, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

No, I wasn't being sarcastic, that's not what I said. I'll often change my opinion for the benefit of consensus, or lack of, as a compromise, no matter how daft that may be, for the benefit or progress. Hence my opinion on these types of disputes shouldn't neseccarily be considered reliable. Whether you understand that principle of mine or not I can't help you with.

I'm not interesting in further disputes, I'm happy to leave the discussions on Twitter/History of Twitter regarding splitting, because they've quite frankly been derailed and turned into a mess. I don't want to waste my time or others with that. So sure, I'll stop commenting there. I apologise given you found my comments disruptive, I shouldn't have commented as much as I did.

I very much hope you're not suggesting I remove the message on my user page, otherwise you will involve an administrator. This would be a coercive threat if so; trying to get me to make an edit, and threatening to involve an admin if I don't. I'll assume good faith that this isn't what you meant, and simply that you don't want me to be disruptive any further which I already agreed to.

If you feel the need to involve an admin, please do so. I feel that the behaviour of all editors involved could do with scrutiny, some more than others. Threatening to involve an admin is fine, but threats with the intent of coercion are not. If an admin believes the opinions expressed on my user page are inappropriate I'll remove them, but not because someone is trying to coerce me into that. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 21:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

You didn't just "change your opinion". You made comments such as Please, share more of your wisdom with me. I'm desperate to learn all of it. and You've always been 100% correct in my eyes, especially when it comes to consensus. You're basically an expert. Ideally you'd be contributing to WP:CON. And then you repeatedly made unconstructive interjections such as Please tell him he's wrong. I know you will. Please tell him. and I knew you could do it :). InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

That settles it then. I was disruptive, I acknowledge that, and already apologised. Thanks for understanding. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 23:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Ops, I'm sorry, it was indeed a mistake. I translated that part of the page and then imported it into itwiki, but for an error, I also published it here

Anyway, shouldn’t Ouroboros "O.B." be changed in Ouroboros "O.B."? Redjedi23 (talk) 19:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I don't think it's necessary to un-bold the quotation marks, but I'm not sure if there are any guidelines that say so. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh ok, I said that for consistency with the Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe: A-L article Redjedi23 (talk) 19:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. I wasn't aware that we were un-bolding the quotation marks elsewhere in the article. In that case, it doesn't hurt to be consistent within the article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:57, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

In case you haven't already got Talk:Crazy,_Stupid,_Love on your watchlist and did not see my message that I had brought the question to WP:FILM then please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Punctuation_in_titles,_period. -- 109.77.196.243 (talk) 19:42, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. WT:FILM is on my watchlist, so I did see your post. I will respond there momentarily. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for the start and high-quality edits made to Gemini! You were very prompt in staying on top of the recent release of Gemini and wrote a quality article. Justanotherinternetguy ε=ε=ε=ε=┌(;￣▽￣)┘ --> talk 17:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

@Justanotherinternetguy: Thank you!! InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:54, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

As you've stopped replying I'll be seeking a consensus a while after the movie is released (I think a month or so is a good idea). I hope you have no problem. Linkin Prankster (talk) 04:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, hopefully by then, the copyright listing or a billing block will have emerged. The reason I don't think we should jump the gun is that if the official title does not include the subtitle, including it here would be an unnecessary disambiguation. The same thing happened with Dune (2021 film) and It (2017 film), where the films billed themselves as "Part One" but didn't actually include subtitles in their official titles. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Hey User:InfiniteNexus, I added reliable premiary NYT secondary sources, thus I requesting you for merging Draft:Letty Ortiz-Letty Ortiz or move to main space, thanks. QalasQalas (talk) 01:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

You have already submitted the draft to AfC; please wait for a reviewer to review it. This process may take from anywhere from a few weeks to a few months, so please be patient. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello there! I appreciate your keen response to the RM and further informing me, and others, on the naming guidelines and procedures. It sure helps out a lot! Though I'm not sure if it will pass with flying colors this time around give the opposition, I want to commend you for your dedicated knowledge and for being through in articulating your points, something I strive for myself. I have started a similar, though somewhat on the reverse, RM at Talk:Marvel's Midnight Suns#Requested move 19 December 2023, after rummaging through some of the naming policies and points I noticed you have made in the past, and I think it may be of interest to you in those regards, and any comments you may have there would be much appreciated and helpful. Thanks in advance, and keep up the great work! Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Yeah, WP:AT can be a lot, and it's frustrating when editors blindly follow COMMONNAME while disregarding the many other guidelines on the same page. I didn't think the RM was going to pass (still not optimistic, but I've had RMs and AfDs in the past that did 180s midway, for better or for worse), which is why I didn't bother to elaborate in my initial !vote. I did try to get everyone on board regarding MCU articles where natural disambiguation can and should be used, but there was pretty heavy opposition last time with similar arguments being raised (that it's ambiguous). I'll take a look at Midnight Suns. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello InfiniteNexus, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Happy editing, Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

—El Millo (talk) 22:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello InfiniteNexus, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Happy editing, Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:26, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Apologies for just being able to share now. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:26, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, and no worries! InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

What was your reasoning for reverting my edit on the talk page of the Apple Watch article? My edit summary was self-explanatory. ItsCheck (talk) 05:28, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

As was mine; editors cannot unilaterally remove sections on article talk pages unless they are vandalism or WP:NOTFORUM posts. The "dispute" has not been resolved, as the AfD has not been closed, and even after it has been closed, the notice should not be removed without reason. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello InfiniteNexus, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Happy editing, adamstom97 (talk) 23:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Happy new year and wishing you a successful 2024! Centcom08 (talk) 18:35, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, and you too! InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Hello, InfiniteNexus,

Please start a move discussion on the article talk page when an article has been at a time for several years rather than being BOLD. Thank you and Happy New Years! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC)