User talk:FMSky

Confusing edit

Why did you change the genres to not be in alphabetical order and change the last album to be inaccurate here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cometh_the_Storm&diff=0&oldid=1219842174 ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

??? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Dude whatever, just revert it then --FMSky (talk) 11:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I dont think genres need to be alphabetical --FMSky (talk) 11:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

By why change their order at all? How is it better being not in alphabetical order? This is what is confusing to me. And why you made the chronology inaccurate. I just don't understand what motivated that. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Cause they're imo more stoner metal so i listed that first but if you disagree just revert it

and i put the album there cause this is a studio album chronology, the other was an EP (without an article) FMSky (talk) 11:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:ALBUM, these chronologies include all albums, not just studio releases. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Even ones without article? pretty weird, since this is mainly for quick navigation --FMSky (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, otherwise, it would be misleading. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Tupac changes

I edited Tupac's lead using sources that contained the opinion of an academic, what's more even an administrator told me that I have good sources. Why consider this a puffery? I have tons of other academic sources that describe Tupac as both a very influential activist and one of the most influential artists of the 20th century. Wikipedia should be a page of information, not a page of personal ideas. Just as it is written to other artists in the lead that they are among the most influential artists of the last century, it must also be written to Tupac. If not, what are academics for? Tupac was a very influential figure culturally and in various fields. Pier1999 (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Reverts

Why do you always revert my edits? Most of the time I don't care, but why would you undo my edits on Christopher Saint Booth and Philip Adrian Booth? I added infoboxes and more detailed information. Furthermore, on the Ulterior Motives article, you also reverted my edits when the article itself is a song and should be written like a song article (with the other info surrounding its status as a lostwave song). Autograph84 (talk) 21:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

On Ulterior Motives it was just an unhelpful rewording on your part that even introduced grammatical errors, and you added a second short description when the article already had one https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ulterior_Motives_%28song%29&diff=1221564712&oldid=1221556784 "The song's was discovered" --FMSky (talk) 21:58, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

May 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Barbra Streisand. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

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

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC)