User talk:Ckfasdf/Archives/2023/October

RM/TR behavior

Hello,

Please explain why you copy-pasted my signature and the timestamp of my original request — to a request to reverse the action that had been taken in response to my request.

I do not understand how such behavior could occur accidentally, and even so, such negligence would reflect a lot about the request.

RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 17:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'd like to object your RM request, but your request was immediately granted and article moved before I can say anything. Since I don't want to use RM form, I assume I can also request RM by slightly modifying the request. But it seems I totally forgot to edit signature and timestamp, I admit that's a mistake on my end. Ckfasdf (talk) 21:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Singapore Airlines fleet. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. SurferSquall (talk) 15:38, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Your reputation precedes you. ... no stranger to edit wars and account blocks, and that is perhaps an issue we need to bear in mind in dealing with their argumentativeness... Ckfasdf (talk) 18:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

My own actions have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this; using those to take away from your own actions is a weak deflection. SurferSquall (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Singapore Airlines fleet. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Wikipedia requires publicly visible citations. Having that citation in the first line of the article isn’t good enough. SurferSquall (talk) 23:11, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

It was called "General Reference", and it was still comply to WP:CITE. Ckfasdf (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Singapore Airlines fleet. 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. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: the warning is unnecessary as I don't think I have violate WP:3RR (I am well aware of this), I also have initiated discussion to resolve the issue on talk page, and lastly the issue have been resolved. Ckfasdf (talk) 06:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

As a page watcher, and according to the revision history, you already hit to the 3RR threshold with revision 1180014583, this revision must be your last revert, this warning is a notice. Please follow the proper BRD procedure until there is a consensus reached before making any further changes to the disputed areas, if there isn't any consensus reached then that disputed areas shouldn't be touched by neither parties. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:03, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

The main issue was resolved when the other party retract his comment and admit his misunderstanding, so nproper BRD was followed. And, my next edit is on different point. Ckfasdf (talk) 08:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ckfasdf Good if it has been resolved. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:12, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

And it was resolved before your warning, that's why i don't think the warning was necessary. Ckfasdf (talk) 09:21, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ckfasdf Well crosschecking the revision history and the talk page doesn't indicates to me where it was "resolved" at that point of time nor currently other than you stating above it has been resolved. All I know is that I got bunch of notification emails (because I watched that page has emails notifications turned on in the Preferences) of revert here and there. Regardless, if this has truely been resolved then you are free to remove this warning/notice per WP:BLANKING. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:28, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

He did remove his comment, said Whoops... (which indicates he misunderstood something) and lastly, he didn't revert my edit on the previously disputed content. So, I assume it was resolved. Ckfasdf (talk) 09:38, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ckfasdf Noted, thanks! Happy editing! — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:40, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

At any case, I will take note to be careful on editing previously disputed article, as it may trigger notification to page watchers. Ckfasdf (talk) 09:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)