User talk:Pretzel butterfly: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
Your failure to listen to other editors' comments about policy including BLP, RS, NOR and SYN is becoming disruptive. Could you please stop. Other editors have read your sources, your proposed edits and your arguments and determined that they violate policy. There is no point in repeating them. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 19:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
Your failure to listen to other editors' comments about policy including BLP, RS, NOR and SYN is becoming disruptive. Could you please stop. Other editors have read your sources, your proposed edits and your arguments and determined that they violate policy. There is no point in repeating them. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 19:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
:TFD, I appreciate you discussing this with me but your critique feels disingenuous and unfairly harsh. The way you are framing this, it implies that it's me-against-everybody-else, but I'm not the only one who with my position. There are multiple people who support inclusion of the material and multiple people who oppose it. The sources fully support inclusion of the material, meet relevant Wikipedia criteria, and every point to the contrary has been fully refuted. I did carefully pay attention to your feedback and have provided references to address it. Once I provided these references, you posted the above message to my talk page. I object to you asking for my silence instead of engaging in reasoned discussion based on evidence. [[User:Pretzel butterfly|Pretzel butterfly]] ([[User talk:Pretzel butterfly#top|talk]]) 19:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
:TFD, I appreciate you discussing this with me but your critique feels disingenuous and unfairly harsh. The way you are framing this, it implies that it's me-against-everybody-else, but I'm not the only one who with my position. There are multiple people who support inclusion of the material and multiple people who oppose it. The sources fully support inclusion of the material, meet relevant Wikipedia criteria, and every point to the contrary has been fully refuted. I did carefully pay attention to your feedback and have provided references to address it. Once I provided these references, you posted the above message to my talk page. I object to you asking for my silence instead of engaging in reasoned discussion based on evidence. [[User:Pretzel butterfly|Pretzel butterfly]] ([[User talk:Pretzel butterfly#top|talk]]) 19:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
||
::Why did you misrepresent the contents of the ''USA Today'' article? [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 22:07, 5 January 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 22:07, 5 January 2021
Welcome!
Hi Pretzel butterfly! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! TFD (talk) 20:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
AOC
Your failure to listen to other editors' comments about policy including BLP, RS, NOR and SYN is becoming disruptive. Could you please stop. Other editors have read your sources, your proposed edits and your arguments and determined that they violate policy. There is no point in repeating them. TFD (talk) 19:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
- TFD, I appreciate you discussing this with me but your critique feels disingenuous and unfairly harsh. The way you are framing this, it implies that it's me-against-everybody-else, but I'm not the only one who with my position. There are multiple people who support inclusion of the material and multiple people who oppose it. The sources fully support inclusion of the material, meet relevant Wikipedia criteria, and every point to the contrary has been fully refuted. I did carefully pay attention to your feedback and have provided references to address it. Once I provided these references, you posted the above message to my talk page. I object to you asking for my silence instead of engaging in reasoned discussion based on evidence. Pretzel butterfly (talk) 19:46, 5 January 2021 (UTC)