User talk:Susrage

September 2023

Hello, I'm Tkbrett. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Come Together, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tkbrett (✉) 00:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

McKay (musician)

I changed the wording in the lead of the article to keep the qualification "the innovator". Carliertwo (talk) 01:20, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing edit

Why did you break alphabetical order on this edit to Backspacer? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know why Eddie was always being put at the bottom of the memeber lists I didn't know you guys were following alphabetical order. Susrage (talk) 03:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no single way of listing these things, unfortunately. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Alice in Chains. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 22:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok why was that edit considered disruputive and why did I get threatened with a loss of editing, that seems very iffy Susrage (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Hello, I'm Daniel Quinlan. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Weezer (Blue Album), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Slayer, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 01:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editing tests

In the future, please consider using your sandbox for testing out additions such as the timeline you added to Samhain (band), that way you can make sure things like that are functioning properly before they get added to an article. Thanks. Taffer😊 💬_(they/she) 19:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for making a mess with the timeline I was really confused at first but apparently it was because pressing enter for each line made the = null Susrage (talk) 19:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guess so, I never knew the timelines were a template, and it looks really confusing to navigate. You're braver than I am lol Taffer😊 💬_(they/she) 19:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This took me like 3 hours to do no kidding lol Susrage (talk) 19:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Heavy" callsign explanation

Hello there. I saw your edit on American Airlines Flight 191. Your edit summary said "American 191 is referred to as heavy in the ATC transcript. I’m unsure on what the guidelines are for how extra names are used in the call sign bullet. The only other place I’ve seen heavy used is with the TWA 800 article. If anyone could explain it’d be appreciated" so I'm here to answer your question. Basically, there's an FAA regulation which says that if an aircraft, usually wide-body ones, has a maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) of 300,000 pounds or more, pilots are required to say "heavy". One of the main reasons why is so the air traffic controller knows what kind of aircraft its dealing with and they can extend the distance between aircraft because heavy wide-body aircraft generally generate more powerful wake-turbulence which has caused some unfortunate incidents such as the 2008 Mexico City Learjet crash, causing 16 deaths. Many more aircraft crashed due to the same problem. See this. There are some other reasons why the word "heavy" is being said but I'm pretty sure this is the main reason. If you have more questions, feel free to ask. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 00:33, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, your feedback is appreciated Susrage (talk) 00:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no problem. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 00:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So if that was the case why was american 191 never called heavy in the article, or other planes in similar cases (united 232 for example). I thought the editors left it off for some other reason Susrage (talk) 00:42, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See this for more information. Since 2010, aircraft which pass the 300,000 pounds MTOW were classified as "heavy". United Airlines Flight 232 crashed in 1989 and American Airlines Flight 191 crashed in 1979 so I'm pretty sure that's why editors left it out. Here's the official FAA document. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 00:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

K that makes sense Susrage (talk) 00:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TURKISH or Turkish

To quote from MOS:ALLCAPS

"Avoid writing with all caps (all capital letters), including small caps (all caps at a reduced size), when they have only a stylistic function. Reduce them to title case, sentence case, or normal case, as appropriate." Writing in all uppercase makes reading words much much harder and becomes an accesabilty issue. Maungapohatu (talk) 22:11, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I don't agree. Captalizing the callsign is a standard across nearly article on aviation incidents and is generally considered to be an appropriate case for spelling. The setence you are citing is mainly about CAPITALIZING IN THE MIDDLE OF A SENTENCE as that is considered an inappropriate case. Capitalizing the call sign doesn't fall within those conditions and I believe it's disingenuous to say that it creates an accessibility issue. It's a bullet point within a summary that stands out to the readers' eyes because it is capitalized. And again, this is a standard across nearly every aviation accident article. Susrage (talk) 23:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying that they entry should be in all upper case characters to make them stand out - exactly the thing the MOS says not to do "when they have only a stylistic function". Be very very careful with the argument that "it is so" on other pages - such arguments tend to be ignored on Wikipedia for very good reasons. Maungapohatu (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really don’t see how you think making a bullet point capitalized is the same thing is using capitalization in the middle of the sentence or is obtrusive to a reader in any way. Also it isn’t a matter of “other pages” it’s the accepted standard with every other article, including articles you’ve had a hand in editing. No other aircraft accident article has their callsign lowercased. You are the only user I’ve seen complain about it Susrage (talk) 03:31, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also you know what else gets ignored on Wikipedia? Telling editors that you “disinclined to listen to them” and arguing with anyone who slightly disagrees with your edits. Susrage (talk) 03:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]