User talk:MrRingtail

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Actually this is the link:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The edit summary field looks like this:

or in the visual editor:

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

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

Important points to note:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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