User talk:Factchecker atyourservice: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Fuck this cesspool of dishonest shitbags |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{retired}} |
|||
''Hello, and welcome!'' |
|||
If you post a comment here, I will reply here to keep things simple.<br> |
|||
And remember: every time you misrepresent a cited source, God kills a kitten. [[God|He]] also does this every time you masturbate. A cranky asshole, that guy is. |
|||
<br> |
|||
{{Archive box|[[/Archive 1]][[/Archive 2]][[/Archive 3]]}} |
|||
== June 2015 == |
|||
[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|alt=Stop icon]] This is another warning; if you make [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal attacks]] on other people again, as you did at [[:User talk:Viriditas/Conservative alternate reality in the United States]], you may be '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]] without further notice'''. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. ''Adding this warnign (again) for the record. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Viriditas/Conservative_alternate_reality_in_the_United_States&diff=prev&oldid=665463123 This] is unacceptable per [[WP:NPA]].''<!-- Template:uw-npa4im --> - [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 13:43, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::It's not something that I would write, but "your essay is really dumb" does in fact comment on content rather than people.[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 13:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Agreed on both counts. But the comment in MrX's "This" link (he sometimes makes the most important part inconspicuous, so don't blink!) is definitely pushing the line. That said, the other day an admin referred twice to "the kind of person" someone is, and no one supported my objection, so go figure. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 13:53, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::It's not only a personal attack (although our indulgence of personal attacks are, at best, inconsistent). It's also unambiguous <s>[[WP:HARRASS]]MENT</s> harrassment, which FCAYS has been warned about before. If admins won't step up and enforce policy then I will just continue to place warnings on this talk page until the incivility stops or we run out of disk space.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 14:10, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::So the problem is with the phrase, "you're writing well above your pay grade"? Seems pretty mild to me. Has Factchecker bothered Viriditas a lot before?[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 14:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I am aware that you consider such insults "mild". I assert that that such comments erode the collaborative atmosphere on which this project relies. I think consensus is on my side, based on our clear, written policies.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 14:35, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::It's certainly mild compared to your template. Have you considered discussion instead of templating? Going around shouting "harasser" is not exactly being sweet, you know.[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 14:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Thanks, your opinion is duly noted.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 14:56, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::That's fine, {{u|MrX}}, provided you're not focusing on any individual(s) based on past bad behavior. You're welcome to comment on alleged PA in [[Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#Comment_Viennese_Waltz_finds_offensive|this thread]], for example—and/or slap a warning template on the user's talk page. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 14:21, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I'm not focusing on anyone. Things appear on my watchlist and I take a look to see how we're working together to make the world's best encyclopedia. Sometimes I'm troubled by what I see. Yeah Jayron32's comment could technically be construed as a personal attack, but it's somewhat oblique and as far as I'm aware he doesn't have a habit of making such comments.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 14:35, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Ok, so we're to hold those who have a history to a higher standard. That's patently wrong in my opinion, no one should be held to a higher standard than anyone else. And seriously, I can't believe you're asserting that "you're writing well above your pay grade" is actually ''worse'' than derogatory references to "the kind of person" one is. The former is about a person's editing competence, the other about his character. I'm genuinely surprised to see that from you, and it makes me question your objectivity in this case. And, by the way, Jayron does have a history of derogatory comments about that particular person, and all the regulars at the Reference Desk are aware of it. So now you're aware. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 14:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::(inserted out of turn) [[User:Mandruss|Mandruss]], the "pay grade" comment was meant to cast doubt on Viriditas's subject-matter expertise, although I think it's pretty clear the essay calls his editing competence into question as well. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 00:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Believe it, because context matters. Jayron32 commented about an editor who made a blatantly misogynistic comment. I'm not defending Jayron32's reaction, but at least there was an impetus. Compare and contrast that to FCAYS showing up at Viriditas' draft article to make an nasty, unsolicited comment. Big difference.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 14:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::[[WP:NPA]] doesn't say don't make personal attacks unless there's reason to do so. It says don't make personal attacks. You're clearly not interested in policy here, so I'm wasting my time. Have a good day. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 14:59, 4 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Yes I agree. So go drop a warning on Jayron32's user talk page and I promise I won't show up to browbeat, wikilawyer or object because his comment was too mild.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] |
|||
{{out}}The essay itself is the most childish sort of personal attack, usually known as outright bigotry. It's always queer when someone gets the idea that they are ''more right than everybody has ever been in the whole history of political disputes'', and that their opponents are not merely individuals who may sometimes wrongly disagree with pristine objective Truths(!), but are actually instead a monolithic collective of individuals whose wrongness is so manifest and pervasive that they are simply ''delusional'' and dwell in an "alternate reality". |
|||
The bit about "epistemic closure" is cute, in a way — a transparent effort to dress up a ridiculous, axe-grinding argument with SAT words. |
|||
As you might expect, this is the sort of thesis that does not stand up well to analysis by others, and can only be expressed via questionable interpretations of statements taken out of context; substitution of narrative for argument; unrestrained exaggeration or distortion of underlying facts; refusal to engage or even acknowledge opposing views that don't support the axe-grinding thesis; reliance on rumor, hearsay, and outright fabrications; simple inability to see a shoe when it's on the other foot; and of course, ''there's always the comparisons to Hitler''... |
|||
You could file all of this under "pathological confirmation bias", but that wouldn't quite do it justice. |
|||
BTW, [[User:MrX|Mr.X]], I'm not sure if you actually bothered to read [[WP:HARASSMENT]], so I'll go ahead and paste it for you here so you can see it doesn't even remotely reply: |
|||
"Harassment is defined as a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons. Usually (but not always) the purpose is to make the target feel threatened or intimidated, and the outcome may be to make editing Wikipedia unpleasant for the target, to undermine them, to frighten them, or to discourage them from editing entirely." |
|||
I invite you to retract your BS claim, but certainly don't expect you to. And actually, if you look at that essay, it's clear that the intention by Viriditas is to insult conservative editors whom he doesn't like or disagrees with. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 00:15, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:I retracted the link to the policy. [[wiktionary:harassment|Wiktionary's second definition of harassment]] is more on point.- [[user: MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 00:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Deliberate pestering and annoying. Hmm. Where have I seen that at Wikipedia? I can't seem to put a finger on it. :-)[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 02:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
==Template warning from [[User:David Eppstein]]== |
|||
[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history at [[: When contact changes minds]] shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit war]]. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle|BRD]] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. |
|||
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|reverts]] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 23:40, 8 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:You realize reverting and templating are not a substitute for policy-driven discussion? Well, you do now. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::The discussion can happen in a more appropriate place than your user page. The templating has a different set of purposes: to get you to stop edit warring and start discussing, or (failing that) to act as a necessary prerequisite to getting you blocked for edit warring if you won't stop. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 23:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::How droll when you're the one edit-warring without any effort at discussion. Read the citations, read WP sourcing policies, and then stop talking because you're clearly wrong. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Hey "cop" == |
|||
[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|alt=Stop icon]] This is warning; if you make [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal attacks]] on someone again, you may be '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]] without further notice'''. I was already communicating to the editor in question, you didn't have act the cop. This means you are bored and want attention. Adding this warning sign so you know I'm serious: Next time I go directly to the administrators' board.--[[User:A21sauce|A21sauce]] ([[User talk:A21sauce|talk]]) 00:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Ok, I just posted a comment before seeing this, but it's a little more constructive than the prior exchange, I hope you'll read it and not go to the boards. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 00:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Question == |
|||
:''The essay belies a sort of blissful self-made ignorance'' |
|||
Care to point out a single inaccuracy? Of course you can't, which is why you attacked it without any comment about a specific problem. The fact remains, reliable sources are all but united in the observation that there is little to no difference between the so-called Democrats and the Republicans, and this is a result of the complete take over of the democratic process by the [[corporatocracy]] which runs the nation behind the scenes, as representational government is little more than theatre meant to pacify senior citizens who aren't paying attention. The fact that virtually ''nothing'' changed between the Bush admin and the Obama admin is clear evidence that the bureaucratic "deep state" is now running the show. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 04:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Hmm, I think I'd ''also'' be hard-pressed to point out any "errors" in ''[[Protocols of the Elders of Zion]]'', but that doesn't mean it isn't patent gibberish. The rest of your comment speaks for itself. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 11:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you for demonstrating the [[backfire effect]]. I realize you must be struggling with your personal conception of politics, no doubt passed on to you from your culture, your family, and your educational establishment. Attributing anything that deviates from your accepted alternate view as a "hoax" is surely comforting. However, there are good reliable sources that will hold your hand and walk you down the Primrose Lane. Since you've got a little bit of free time, why don't you start with [http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf this one]? There will be a quiz. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 19:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Your grasp of logic must be very firm, as I was ''clearly'' intimating that the piece was a hoax! (Great job!) You are intelligent and frightfully well-informed, as your essay suggests. All the best with it. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:34, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== June 2015 == |
|||
[[File:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px|alt=Warning icon]] Please stop your [[Wikipedia:Disruptive editing|disruptive editing]]. If you continue to [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable|delete or edit]] legitimate talk page comments, as you did at [[:Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)]], you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]. ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mattress_Performance_(Carry_That_Weight)&diff=665905019&oldid=665904889] ''<!-- Template:uw-tpv3 --> [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 07:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::You're seriously templating me for deleting your four-word comment "No, we shall not" — ''after'' I deleted my own comment that you were replying to? Even after my edit summary indicated that I "hoped you didn't mind"? Pray tell, how is this disruptive, and how is it productive to template me for it two days later? [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 11:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
==Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion== |
|||
[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] |
|||
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]] regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 12:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Cool, that is probably the best place to begin talking about content policies. That whole "article talk page" thing is a big waste of time! [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 12:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Talking about content policies is also completely unnecessary. If you don't like something, remove it. Seek to have the other party blocked if he does not accept your unjustified editing. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== June 2015 == |
|||
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> [[Image:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock]] You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' from editing for a period of '''1 week''' for [[WP:Edit warring|edit warring]]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|make useful contributions]]. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|appeal this block]] by first reading the [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]], then adding the following text below this notice: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}.<p>During a dispute, you should first try to [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|discuss controversial changes]] and seek [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]]. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request [[Wikipedia:Page protection|page protection]]. -- [[:en:User:GB fan|GB]] [[:en:User talk:GB fan|fan]] 13:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock --> |
|||
{{unblock reviewed | 1=Normally I don't dispute blocks as a matter of courtesy to admins, but this one is long and ''wrong''. One IP user and two account users who edit-warred without even stating a policy objection were not blocked, or even warned. This is a simple case of partisan editors ganging up to violate content policies in a specific, improperly biased way—and admins punishing the ''unpopular'' party who happens to be clearly in the right. Is dispute resolution a pre-requisite any time an editor wants to add appropriate material from a publication that has a non-leftist political alignment? [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC) | decline = Whether you're right or wrong, edit warring is never the way ahead. See also [[WP:NOTTHEM]]. [[User:Huon|Huon]] ([[User talk:Huon|talk]]) 00:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)}} |
|||
::'''Comment''' Hmm, edit-warring seems to have been the way ahead for the parties who edit-warred to violate content policies and weren't even warned for it. Thus it's difficult for me to make sense of this response. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== <big><big>So, we can fairly conclude:</big></big> == |
|||
:*Wikipedia is full of insecure leftists who live in mortal terror that somebody on the Internet ''might actually read'' a criticism that the insecure leftists consider to be dumb and wrong |
|||
:*[[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]] is in fact a core Wikipedia policy which empowers insecure leftists to remove commentary that they consider to be dumb and wrong, completely irrespective of all of the other Wikipedia content policies, with a particular emphasis on ignoring NPOV and V |
|||
[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]], you don't seem to be having much better luck. I see you're encountering a full range of bullshit policy arguments, from "the editorial is wrong" and "the editorial is partisan", to my personal favorite, "I don't see how the editorial [which was specifically written by the entire newspaper ed board just to criticize the article subject] is ''relevant'' [to the article subject]". |
|||
TBH, I don't think they are going to run out of BS arguments anytime soon, so you will probably have to keep running in circles to their satisfaction, or else give up and let them do what they want. |
|||
Oh, and of course there's that stalwart IP who doesn't seem to realize that if some people in 2015 in America actually oppose gay marriage because of a belief about religion or morality, they are quite a bit less likely to change their mind after merely ''meeting a gay person and chatting with him for a few minutes''. So, I guess we can add "commentary which some insecure leftists find puzzling, but which is otherwise quite clear" to the list of materials that are automatically excluded based solely on a leftist hissy fit. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 11:50, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Cool story, bro. That might [[Will it play in Peoria?|play in Peoria]], but here, west of the Rockies, we know Fox News is satire. Here's a little study I always like to bring up: |
|||
<blockquote>Some studies have shown that people who are homophobic are more likely to have repressed homosexual desires.[57] In 1996, a controlled study of 64 heterosexual men (half said they were homophobic by experience, with self-reported orientation) at the University of Georgia found that men who were found to be homophobic (as measured by the Index of Homophobia)[58] were considerably more likely to experience more erectile responses when exposed to homoerotic images than non-homophobic men.[59] Another study in 2012 arrived at similar results when researchers found that students who came from "the most rigid anti-gay homes" were most likely to reveal repressed homosexual attraction.[60] The researchers noted that this explained why some religious leaders who denounce homosexuality are later revealed to have secret homosexual relations.[60] The researchers noted that "these people are at war with themselves and are turning this internal conflict outward."[60]</blockquote> |
|||
:Have a ''fabulous'' day! :) [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I live way the hell east of Peoria, and I'm rather gay-friendly, bro. I bet I'm more ''fabulous'' than you, even if you started out in the children's chorus for ''Joseph'' at age six. Again, your inferential powers are fucking weak as hell. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 22:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::Why don't conservatives have a sense of humor? I'm straight, but I'm genuinely confused by the conservative ''obsession'' with the sexuality/gender/ethnicity of other people who are ''not like them''. This is the party that wants to get the government out of other people's lives? Yeah, ''right''! [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 23:04, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::I think you meant to put the period/fullstop after "I'm straight, but I'm genuinely confused". ;) [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Collaboration requested == |
|||
Would you like to collaborate on [[User:Viriditas/Brownbackistan]] with me? It could use a conservative touch. However, given the trend with red states trying to out-Taliban the Taliban,[http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/idaho-republicans-public-schools-should-use-the-bible-as-a-science-and-law-textbook/] one wonders if we should widen the scope to include all red states as potential Christian caliphates-in-progress. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:27, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Yeah, I don't think I can help with your essays, and your mention of "Christian caliphates" suggests you're still just trying to raise hackles. Decline as not a sincere offer, and a bad idea to boot. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:04, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::Again, where is your sense of humor? You didn't really think I was serious, did you? On the other hand, the Repbulicans in Kansas and Idaho appear quite serious about giving the Taliban a run for their money. Does this not bother you? Why do you give the conservative right a free pass when their beliefs and actions are all but indistinguishable from the Taliban? [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 23:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::I just didn't notice both comments were by you. Anyway, there must be someone out there that can take a comparison between Kansas bible-thumpers and the Taliban seriously, right? There is probably a usenet group somewhere out there on the tubes. Just fire up Netscape Communicator. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:24, 10 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Section for receiving apologies for wrongful edit-warring == |
|||
[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] I see that your already obvious wrongness was established even further as RSN, but I noticed that not only did you ''not'' lash out angrily or insult the intelligence of others there, nor did you thank [[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] for having the patience to fill out all the necessary forms and wait in all the necessary lines to stop your inappropriate editing — oh hey, you graciously continued dishing personal attacks against him in your edit summaries, how nice! — but on top of all that ''I also don't seem to have an apology from you'' for edit-warring, wrongly reverting me repeatedly, and having irrational hissy fits about a source you don't like and seem to have delusions about. |
|||
I additionally note that even now in the wake of being shown wrong, you're making [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=When_contact_changes_minds&type=revision&diff=666685431&oldid=666685244 POV-pushing] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=When_contact_changes_minds&type=revision&diff=666685244&oldid=666684586 edits] that are unlikely to withstand further scrutiny, ignoring sourcing guidelines and thereby skewing the weight according to your particular "I-hate-conservatives so they're wrong" preferences. |
|||
To wit, you insist on giving roughly quadruple the weight to a ''blog piece published online by a recent college grad and video game columnist who claims an affinity for social sciences and has no other relevant credentials'', than is given to the editorial board of the most widely subscribed physical print newspaper in the United States. |
|||
I suggest you quit while you're nominally ahead, most dear and kind sir. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:32, 12 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Section for noting improper conduct of others which I was blocked for == |
|||
[[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]], I see you're still edit-warring on this a week later, without having made the ''slightest'' effort to engage in a policy talk. |
|||
To date you have contributed precisely zero bytes of discussion. Actually even the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=When_contact_changes_minds&curid=46759922&diff=666945441&oldid=666918320 section-blanking IP] has brought to bear more effort and expertise on this issue in just ''one'' wildly inappropriate edit, than you have in a whole week. |
|||
Presumably this is because you know you're so clearly in the wrong. Congrats on being so very bad and wrong and an irresponsible editor to boot. Your improper edits won't stand. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 23:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== FYI (signing) == |
|||
Your recent edit at Nomo's talk page is unsigned. [[User:Capitalismojo|Capitalismojo]] ([[User talk:Capitalismojo|talk]]) 00:43, 17 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:bot will fix. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 00:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
==Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion== |
|||
[[Image:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] |
|||
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]] regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]]. The thread is [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Factchecker_atyourservice reported by User:Nomoskedasticity (Result: )]]. <!--Template:An3-notice--> Thank you. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 11:40, 17 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:How adorable. You know policy isn't on your side, you aren't in fact participating in the discussion, and you're edit-warring too. Of course, you're one of those people who tries to avoid content disputes by attacking the editor you disagree with. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 11:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Requesting feedback == |
|||
Please see my suggested editing guideline regarding [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice/Innuendo|innuendo]]. Thanks. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 22:02, 20 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Message == |
|||
Please stop leaving me nasty messages. FYI... I have left a comment on the user's talk page about the quote they added.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AChisme&type=revision&diff=668864121&oldid=651169393] [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 05:26, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Viriditas&diff=668835980&oldid=668717527 You are really losing it.] [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 05:55, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Gosh, yes, you're right! I wonder what could have motivated me to leave such a message on a user's talk page? [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 15:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::I do not understand this. People get all kinds of negative views in their heads all the time, many of them correct, but they don't write them all down unless they have [[coprolalia]]. Factchecker, what you said grossly violated [[WP:Civil]], and it may well get you into some deep trouble unless you retract or apologize or give some explanation.[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 15:56, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::My explanation is that the user is garbage and has responded to days of patient discussion with endless insults, dishonesty, and [[WP:IDHT|not hearing that]]. If you don't like, it I am sure you will have no trouble locating an administrator willing to block me for it. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 15:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::Can you quote any of the "endless insults"? Can you do it at [[WP:ANI]]? If so, then retract your own insult, and go to ANI. Geez. I'm not going to ask for you to be blocked, but do you think everyone else at WIkipedia likes you as much as I do?[[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 16:04, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I could, but I won't. I appreciate the time you have taken to defend me in the past, but I think I am not long for this increasingly worthless 'pedia, and recommend you stop. [[User:Factchecker_atyourservice|Centrify <small>(f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username)</small>]] [[User_talk:Factchecker_atyourservice|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Factchecker_atyourservice|(contribs)]] 16:05, 27 June 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 16:09, 27 June 2015
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.