Talk:The Amazing Rhythm Aces

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Amazing Rhythm Aces article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Country music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Country music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to country music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Country musicWikipedia:WikiProject Country musicTemplate:WikiProject Country musicCountry music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tennessee Low‑importance

	Tennessee portal The Amazing Rhythm Aces is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Missed the dog and the point

Insisting on missing the point or just a lapse in memory? "There has never been a suggestion that Oxford commas are prohibited. The point is that an absence of Oxford commas is not prohibited either, as Hoggardhigh is seeking to impose. They have mounted a sustained campaign for at least 4 years, a prominent part of which is to impose their preferred, valid style to the exclusion of another equally valid style. That is plainly disruptive. Again, the same would apply if their campaign was to conversely impose the removal of Oxford commas." If emphasis of the latter is required, I have also reverted users (FWIW usually fellow Brits) seeking eradication of valid Oxford commas, on multiple occasions.

Ever tried self-application with your blunt red gift? Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you cite the style ban on the absence of Oxford commas that you are supporting Hoggardhigh to impose? Would you similarly assist a user (blocked or otherwise) persistently imposing the removal of Oxford commas? Shall we all just mess about, pointlessly flip-flopping between valid styles rather than writing this encyclopedia thingy? Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"So fucking what"? Considered, razor sharp and addresses those pesky questions head on! Tell the dog joke again.

Do better. Here. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:22, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mybe you should be the one "doing better", since I notice that it's a simple question you've been unable to actually answer. I mean, "some other guy did this, so it's bad!" isn't the convincing rhetoric you seem to think it is.

Oh, let me ask you: Can you cite the style ban on the use of Oxford commas? --Calton | Talk 02:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You might find it more fruitful debating with people if you read what they've said. If and when you do and still don't spot the simply-expressed and explicit answer to your redundant question, I can re-re-quote it. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:40, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Failed to find it? Or to look? Does "There has never been a suggestion that Oxford commas are prohibited" (the second sentence of this thread) indicate any sense or purpose in asking "Can you cite the style ban on the use of Oxford commas?"? If that isn't plain enough, add "I have... reverted users... seeking eradication of... Oxford commas", i.e., I have protected the use of Oxford commas. That should be a start in directing your dog to the right tree. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]