User talk:Purplewowies

How Purplewowies organizes this page

This is the talk page for the user Purplewowies.

Messages posted to this page are dealt with in various ways:

1. When there are two or more WikiProject Wikify messages, all but the most recent may be moved to the Wikify Messages Archive. Purplewowies manually archives these when she notices they are taking over her talk page.
2. Other old/read messages may be moved to another archive or removed entirely.
3. Some old messages stay on the page, either because Purplewowies thinks they are important, or because she does not want to remove them for some other reason.
4. Barnstars are moved to Purplewowies's userpage.

Thank you,

Purplewowies (talk)

Welcome!

Hello, Purplewowies, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Kingturtle (talk) 16:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

thank you

I'm a new Wikipedian so I'm still working out the barn star thing but here,✨ the hard-working wiki person triple barn star, for your work on the Ralph breaks the internet article. And a cookie for helping me learn about Wikipedia 🍪 (you deleted one of my edits but your helping me learn 😀)

Your request for rollback

Hi Purplewowies. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Purplewowies. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Tiffany Thornton

BTW: That link you fixed on Tiffany Thornton had a bad accessdate and it was also 404. If you think I'm complaining, please realize I do this more than you! Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 02:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

History of Deaf Education

I updated my talk page in response to your suggestion.

Hello, Purplewowies. You have new messages at Ncaselli's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ncaselli (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia Revival

Hello, I'm Jamesjpk. I wanted to let you know that the Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia, has been tagged with a semi-active tag. I am messaging you about this because you are listed under the wiki-project's list of active participants. Please contribute to the WikiProject if you want to keep it alive! I hope that it becomes active again! Jamesjpk (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Purplewowies. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

About Fix-It Felix Jr.

Fix-It Felix Jr., was originally intended to be only from the movie, but in reality, that is left behind, it actually exists, but it started as the Wreck-It Ralph promotion. Just people like you, deny the presence of the game in real life and not admit a related article, because you haven't seen or played it, I have played. It deserves to be, like the other games from the other movies.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8sssti_mCY&t=75s

I defend this article, because I have proof of it, and in the words of Jules Verne: "Everything that man imagines becomes a reality" and video games aren't the exception. Fix-It Felix Jr. must be in the Post-fictional category, Bbcause it has been seen hundreds of times by many people who hadn't imagined that this game really existed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ofihombre (talk • contribs) 13:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
99		Zack Martin (Suite Life) (talk)	Add sources
137		Tazo (talk)	Add sources
116		That's So Suite Life of Hannah Montana (talk)	Add sources
3,057		Lele Pons (talk)	Add sources
52		Day of the Dumpster (talk)	Add sources
68		PBS Kids Preschool Block (talk)	Add sources
1,113		The Suite Life on Deck (talk)	Cleanup
211		Wendy Wu: Homecoming Warrior (talk)	Cleanup
159		Make Way for Noddy (talk)	Cleanup
64		Mentadent (talk)	Expand
1,004		Mega Man (talk)	Expand
43		Signing Time! (talk)	Expand
167		Mr. Moseby (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
68		Signing Exact English (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
283		Fighter pilot (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
713		Language acquisition (talk)	Merge
298		Mighty Morphin Alien Rangers (talk)	Merge
189		Nick Jr. (block) (talk)	Merge
14		Lady's Choice (talk)	Wikify
931		Rampage (video game) (talk)	Wikify
10		History of deaf education (talk)	Wikify
2		Tanya Zolotoroff Nash (talk)	Orphan
4		Co-enrollment (talk)	Orphan
3		Claire L. Ramsey (talk)	Orphan
26		Disneymania 4 (talk)	Stub
23		¡Sorpresa! (talk)	Stub
26		Kibon (talk)	Stub
4		Schlegel's francolin (talk)	Stub
8		Mary Kate McGeehan (talk)	Stub
26		Unilever Nepal (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:43, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	You are doing great in Anti-vandalism work. I am impressed about your nice contributions. This barnstar for you. Keep it safely. Happy editing. Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 08:51, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. I don't feel like I've been doing that lately that much so the appreciation is, well, appreciated. - Purplewowies (talk) 04:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Purplewowies. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Confirm Involvement in WikiProject Disney

Hello Purplewowies! I'm a new member of the Disney WikiProject. I'm trying to confirm who is still interested in the WikiProject in hopes to build a team of that can revamp the project. Please let me know if you would like to stay on the list of active members, or if I can go ahead and move to you the list of inactive members. You can do so by replying to this message and including the {{reply to|GeekInParadise}} tag. Happy editing! GeekInParadise (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

GeekInParadise: My editing feels more "tangent"-like now (I still edit Disney articles but I feel like I'm on the fringes a bit due to real life taking the wheel lately). On the one hand, I still feel like I should be considered active (and I certainly like the idea of staying on that list), but on the other I don't feel like I'd contribute directly to the project or reviving it on a high enough level to be considered active in terms of that purpose. So... do whatever you think is right based on what I've said in this reply? XD - Purplewowies (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I just purged 100+ people and just trying to get rid of people who have zero interest. Unless you want to move yourself, i'll keep you listed. GeekInParadise (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Cole Sprouse

Hi,

I added both because they significantly collapse the vertical space used by the various headers. Obviously they do more when there are multiple items but given they still effect a reduction even with one entry, I figure it's worth it given that page has other header elements also (Talk header, BLP notice, etc.). If pages just have one WikiProject listed and not much else, I don't bother. Joeyconnick (talk) 22:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at List of Odd Squad episodes

Hey, so, I tried to ping you, but I don't think it worked. Do you think you could come over to the talk page and give your thoughts on the discussion? Thanks. Ghinga7 (talk) 04:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, it was resolved. Carry on with whatever you're doing. Ghinga7 (talk) 18:33, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ghinga7: For the record, just so you know, I got the ping fine but wasn't sure what I could add at the time (plus real life has been stretching me thin lately). Glad it was resolved, though! - Purplewowies (talk) 21:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Inadequate lead

Template:Inadequate lead has been nominated for merging with Template:Lead too short. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. · • SUM1 • · (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dylan Sprouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Invite to Join WikiProject for Spoken Wikipedia

Hi Purplewowies! I am Galendalia and I have revived the WikiProject for Spoken Wikipedia. I noticed that you signed up at some point to be a participant and as I am reviving this project, one of my tasks is to get the participant list in order. Would you please go to the Participants List and add your name and language(s) you speak? If you are already there and do not want to be, please move yourself to the inactive list at the bottom of the page. If you want to remain, please put remain next to your name (this way you are not moved). If I do not see anything from you by May 30, 2020, I will move you to the inactive participant list. It would also be great if you would be willing to join the task force for Pronunciation that would be awesome, as there are troublesome words we run into. Thank you for considering joining us. If you decide to leave, I will be sad to see you leave as so many people have done a great job on the recordings and any work you have done makes a significant difference. Galendalia (talk · contribs) (sent via Mass Message. This is a message that is one time, so no unsubscribe link is provided.)

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia at 11:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC).

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Ralph Breaks the Internet

Congrats dude! The article you were working on, Ralph Breaks the Internet, has passed the GA-criteria, becoming a good article on January 13, 2021. Great job on the improvements! For you're hard work, I award you this interesting image of some birds. Enjoy! Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 02:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Saw that you like Ralph Breaks the Internet and Wreck-it Ralph, cool that you're enjoying the films. Indepthstory (talk) 02:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your revert on the Piper Reese article. I myself was wondering if this was an appropriate citation. However, now I'm led to ask, is TheMovieProducer.com considered a reliable source? After several minutes of researching, I'm not even sure that Reese's work with Delta Airlines received enough third-party mention as to warrant its encyclopedic value. Maybe that whole "resume building experience" should be removed from Wikipedia? - I am dis big (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

@I am dis big: At a glance, I'm not sure TheMovieProducer is reliable. It (the Delta Airlines thing) might be worth removal? (I'd elaborate but I've been on and off brain foggy today.) - Purplewowies (talk) 23:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I think I'm going to delete that paragraph as "cruft" -- there are no other sourcing efforts on Wikipedia utilizing TheMovieProducer<dot>com. - I am dis big (talk) 13:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your catch over at Odd Squad for my unintentional Header removal. The visual editing feature was malfunctioning last night and before I switched over to source editor, the deletion had already been done and I didn’t catch it so I appreciate that on your part! Thanks again. Here’s a freshly baked cookie!

Elvisisalive95 (talk) 13:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Some falafel for you!

Thank you for appropriately tagging the section I reintroduced in Societal and cultural aspects of autism! I had planned to do so myself, but I forgot! Here is some falafel for your help :) Kindly, Pinecone23 (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Evidently

I could possibly hash some of this out here. You're not making the right edits. As for summaries that's not exactly a hot topic on here but I understand you don't like "plowing" through an edit. I may be multi-skilled but I don't share your opinion. Indepthstory (talk) 01:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

As for MOS that's up for debate. Surely you see that not everything you are saying is cut and dried. You edit in at least two areas on this site, right? I can provide examples of how you are miscontruing MOS. Indepthstory (talk) 01:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps Zero, the dog doesn't belong on The Nightmare Before Christmas page, but maybe he does? For example you put it seemed out of place, was extraneous, and oddly phrased. I'll submit to you it may belong and you could redo the wording. Indepthstory (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

You say the following wording doesn't "seem" to follow MOS. An editor said Featuring an ensemble cast spearheaded by Debby Ryan as the title character, the series also stars... What? It's acceptable to use the phrase ensemble cast (look it up). Similarly it's fine to start a sentence with the word featuring. What are you talking about here? Indepthstory (talk) 01:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Indepthstory: ...Did you start poring through my edits looking for things you could construe as me misinterpreting the MOS? Asking because I didn't even remember that last one and had to ctrl-f my own user contributions to find it over 250 pages down, at the beginning of this year. You are right that the Manual of Style is a guideline and not a policy, but I can definitely cite the reasons I removed part (but not all) of your edit--namely, it links countries that do not need to be linked and uses several unwieldy semicolon constructions where standard sentences would work fine. I left the note on your talk page purely to attempt to better explain that and suggest using edit summaries, so I'm not completely clear on why you have cited random examples of edits of mine you disagree with going back a year, neither of which are actually directly MOS related at all (even the one that says MOS in the summary--my issue was not with the "ensemble cast" phrasing, IIRC, and more to do with the fact it sounded a bit like an editorial and not like an encyclopedia). Further, what do you mean by "the right edits"? What are the right edits, according to you? - Purplewowies (talk) 06:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Cite away, don't misplace your sight! Yes, you could certainly brush up and improve on MOS. Indepthstory (talk) 10:19, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, if I became or am a magnificent writer I suppose then you would be giving my opinions scrutiny. Wikipedia unfortunately is not home to incredible writing-not very much at least. Ya, the GA and FA, additionally other things (article of the week) encourage the ideal skills. Part of the problem is it's not easy to write an encylopeda. A good bit is left up to discretion or just plain likes, also what people have seen or been around the most. Indepthstory (talk) 10:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Not sure how much time I want to designate for this at the current time-holidays, etc. Maybe I can find a little bit of time for it... Linking countries, that's a good one. They are not mentioned that often, really, they aren't. There are 200 or so, I don't think the top 15 have to have every single mention noted, generally I go for one per article. Indepthstory (talk) 10:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

A perfect example, well two... I can't find it now. You seem to have said that co-lead is wrong, it isn't. Vulture, an established source and site, uses it. I am sure many sources do as well. I added something you were completely off on, it fits very well. A user posted something about the motivations of a character. They were correct, you aren't. They didn't have a good vocabulary or usage of terms, so just fix it. Don't remove it. Indepthstory (talk) 10:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Semicolon constructions are actually fine and desirable at times, often they are good, lend depth. A good article does not have 15 or so pithy and short phrases (sentences) in a mere few paragraphs or so. Indepthstory (talk) 10:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Could you just leave Odd Squad alone? Write here what you think is so awful. Indepthstory (talk) 10:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

You did not like "Then, they reconcile." They then reconcile would work quite adequately. Sometimes you're going further than is called for. Indepthstory (talk) 10:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Indepthstory: I don't think three or four consecutive semicolons is desirable (hence why I cited the section of MOS that describes what I mean, so that I can try to point out where general Wikipedia consensus shares my concern). It makes the passages hard to read. If you're looking to get an article up to GA, I don't think those semicolon constructions will help, and frankly, I think if someone was GA reviewing they'd say the entire cast section is unduly large. (That's not something that is on you; it was like that for years and is something I'm bad at figuring out if there's a way to pare down and no one else has tried, either.) The MOS also suggests not linking countries in the way you have. If you are interested in improving the article in the eyes of other people (not just me), then they'll probably be interested in how much it follows MOS (and why it doesn't in the places where it doesn't). Your edit also reinstated other links I removed (for instance in the awards section, it reinstates several links to the same article that were in quick succession in the table). Further, I didn't remove that edit from July you decided to add back as part of your edits because I thought mentioning motivations was bad; I removed it because it was written like an entry on Fandom and not like an encyclopedia article. The version you added had errors that didn't exist in the original addition as well.

My last revert was made before I saw this message and I actually thought about reverting most of my own edit as a show of goodwill, but I thought the bigger issues in that revert (new spelling issues, for one) were enough that adding them back myself would be unconstructive, even as an attempt to lower the temperature in this interaction. I'm not going to lie, those errors being reintroduced have me itching to want to remove them again, but this time, knowing that you've responded to me and that we are discussing this, I'm doing my best to attempt to follow some version of WP:BRD (even though I did not make the original bold edit, just performed the original revert... now we're discussing! fantastic!) in an attempt to avoid this becoming a full-on, protracted edit war, so I'm not reverting the edit again at present since it's a mix of things that unambiguously need adjusting (spelling issues, etc.) and things that are just in dispute (style and tone issues, etc.).

Further, "You did not like "Then, they reconcile."" "You seem to have said that co-lead is wrong, it isn't." refer to edits I do not remember making (or at least do not remember making with the rationales you're ascribing to me, so I can't figure out which ones you're talking about in order to clarify). If these are related to the content dispute on Odd Squad, could you link the diffs in question? If this is more of going through my past not-Odd-Squad-related edits in order to tell me you think something's wrong with them, your behavior is coming off as something within the ballpark of hounding. At present I'm "leav[ing] Odd Squad alone" so that the edit war does not continue (in fact--it's the holidays, so I'm likely to be on Wikipedia less or not at all anyway; maybe the break will cool down this whole interaction?), but in the long run I'm unlikely to do that; you do not own the article and neither do I, so we're both allowed to edit it, I'm afraid.

In case I do not respond to you again until after they have passed, have a happy holiday. - Purplewowies (talk) 16:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Indepthstory: (Apologies for the incorrect pings before) I plan to make some changes to Odd Squad that are unlikely to be considered controversial (i.e. they're spelling and grammar fixes) but are connected to content added in the most recent edits you made. We need to come to a consensus on the style dispute, though--that is, we need to determine whether to follow the manual of style (my current position is that we should) or else why we're not. I'm unlikely to make edits like this within the next several hours or maybe even the next day, but I wanted to give you a heads up and remind you of this discussion. Thanks. - Purplewowies (talk) 23:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Probably you could make changes but in increments. You are not the only user making these edits which don't seem right to me. I can show you the reasoning. Indepthstory (talk) 03:29, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

@Indepthstory: I will probably make my entire grammar/spelling fix edit at once, because it is more efficient. Telling me I can do it, but only in a certain way, makes it sound like I have to go through you to be "allowed" to edit the article. Further, could you explain your reasoning for ignoring the parts of the manual of style (a commonly-accepted guideline) that I cited, then, instead of saying you can show me the reasoning and then making another edit that (alongside some other things) puts forward more of the style that is in dispute? Coming to a consensus involves discussion, not just making the edits anyway while other parties avoid making changes in order to not prolong an edit war. (EDIT 04:37, 28 December 2024 (UTC): I might shift some of this discussion to the article talk page (that is, summarize things there) in the interest of getting more eyes on it than would see it on my talk page.) - Purplewowies (talk) 04:31, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

You're going way too far. Please chill, I don't see what you are trying to do here. I am insuring correct grammar. If you put things up that are not correct I will remove it. Indepthstory (talk) 08:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC)