User talk:AmberLovesEverything

... because

1. Again it was dropped into the middle of a section instead of at its end -- and just like your other unsuccessful attempts at contributing, you inserted it into the middle of another example.
2. It's not a Film example -- it is a Live-Action TV example. Just because it was a news segment about movie stars does not make it about movies.

It has become painfully clear that you are incapable of following even the simplest instructions, and cannot be trusted to perform the simplest act of a troper without utterly and completely bungling it. Thus, per the warning given at the end of June, you are now the lucky recipient of a temporary ban. Because of the usual frequency of your edits, we are taking the somewhat unusual step of tempbanning you for three months so as to inconvenience you in a manner that a shorter tempban would inconvenience an editor who posts more frequently.

Be aware that if after your tempban ends you continue to make unacceptable attempts at editing, we may be forced to permanently ban you in order to protect the wiki from the corruption of its content.

-- Looney Toons, admin

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Okay, I'll put in the live-action TV section instead, Thank you for telling me.

I'm sorry about my edit, Please unblock me again.

You've been "sorry" about things in the past, but never bothered to follow the rules after apologizing.

The tempban remains in place. Yes, it is a punishment for repeatedly breaking the rules.

... because

1. Once again it was dropped into the middle of a section instead of at its end, giving the impression that it's part of the example about Stephen Colbert.
2. Other than the link in it, it's lacking all proper markup, least of all the bullet point that would indicate it's a new example and not part of the previous example.
3. Thanks to careless punctuation it's a single run-on sentence.

That's quite a lot wrong to manage in less than 300 bytes. If you look just a few lines down you will see that seven months ago we pointed out some of these same errors in another of your edits and directed you, not for the first time, to our Style Guide. In response you promised to "do better next time".

You didn't.

According to section 2.3, bullet point 3 on How We Do Bans Around Here, "Refusing to learn from honest mistakes, or repeatedly making the same honest mistake after it's been pointed out" is grounds for a warning on the first occurrence and a tempban on a repeated occurrence. This is your warning. You have made pretty much exactly the same errors as last time, despite us pointing them out, telling you what to do to avoid them, and getting a promise from you to improve. Should you submit another instance of one or more of these errors to the moderation queue as part of a future edit, you will receive a one-week temporary ban. If after that ban you do it again, you will be at risk of a permanent ban, per section 2.2, bullet point 8 of How We Do Bans Around Here.

It would take no more than a dozen or so keystrokes to make your edit acceptable. Take the time to learn those keystrokes. I cannot imagine how a rational person would rather accept a ban than put in the absolutely miniscule effort needed to make their contributions welcomed with open arms, but we have seen it time and time before. We hope it won't be necessary in your case. Read the Style Guide. It's not all that big, and doesn't have all that much that you didn't already learn by your high school English classes.

Please respond in this thread and acknowledge receipt of this warning. Be aware that the "Thank" function will not be accepted as a response, and that ignoring moderator communications is also grounds for a warning on the first occurrence and a tempban on a repeated occurrence.

-- Looney Toons, admin

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

We've been generous and allowed almost a month for you to reply. However, you have not. That may be because you haven't been on the wiki in a month. It may be because you're ignoring us. Quite honestly, your edit history suggests the former rather than the latter, and because of that we are going to impose a non-punitive "attention getter" tempban on you in order to make sure you read this thread. Because you seem to drift in and make a single edit every six to eight months, we're going to take the unusual step of tempbanning you for a year, just to make sure it's in place the next time you wander by. As an "attention-getter" temp ban, it will be immediately lifted when you reply in this thread.

-- Looney Toons, admin

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

I'm sorry about that, I'll reply next time. Please unblock my IP address.

Done.

... but in the future, please add all new examples to the end of the section or page as appropriate -- not dropped, half marked-up, in the middle of an extended section on another author's books entirely, as you did here. Robert A. Heinlein did not write Alice in Wonderland, so it should not appear between entries for two of his novels.

I believe we've said this before to one or the other of your known aliases, but we strongly encourage you to read our Style Guide. Pay special attention to the "tl;dr" section at the top.

-- Looney Toons, admin

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Whoops, sorry about that, I was trying to write that the description for the illustrated edition of Alice's Adventures, of course in the design, crafts and books website that book had translated into 170 languages and had the people didn't research or watch the film adaptations of the novel, I'll do better at it next time.