User talk:Corinal

edit warring?

This edit summary [1] raises concerns about your familiarity with what is and is not edit warring. The relevant policy here is WP:BRD. Your previous edit was WP:BOLD. My following edit was the R. No problem yet. At this point, we are supposed to discuss it with each other. It looks like both of us may have been discussing the opening sentence in separate sections. I am most definitely NOT about to take this to a drama board at this point. But the fact is that the B and R edits by you and me were both within policy, while your following re-revert was not. If, upon reading this, you agree, one way to cure the problem would be to self revert. I am not demanding that, merely pointing it out as an option if one thinks one has erred. Adoring nanny (talk) 11:54, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

My previous edit was not WP:BOLD it had already been discussed in the talk page. Xoltered (talk) 11:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, it gets confusing, because like you, I had also made a previous change to the lead and was also discussing it on the talk page. So we both were, just not with each other. I therefore have an equally weak case as you do to put in my favored version of the opening sentence. I say "equally weak" because I think both of our cases are weak here, as we had not been discussing with each other. In such a case, I still think the appropriate thing to do is to return to status quo ante. But I'm not going to WP:EW that. Adoring nanny (talk) 12:00, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Well my edit was supported by another editor on the talk page (infact thats where i got the idea in the first place), and you reverted it without discussion. Either way, you said you don't have a problem with it being there so i hope this can be resolved. Further discussion should be taken to the talk page. Xoltered (talk) 12:03, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

About the "further discussion", yes. About the "reverted without discussion", the "R" in "BRD" is before the "D". So yes, that's appropriate. It is typically up to the "B" person to initiate the "D". Now it gets confusing because there were two different "D" going on. I failed to notice yours, and I'm unclear if you noticed mine or not. So we both may have failed in that regard. But my "R" is still within policy. When you say someone else was outside policy, you invite discussions such as this one, especially when it is arguable if you were yourself in policy or not. There is also a further problem with your edit summary. See WP:SUMMARYNO. Adoring nanny (talk) 12:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Actually, sorry to be obtuse, but which talk page discussion are you saying suggested your change to the lead? I do see several posts by you, but none within the past week that I noticed. Mine was in the discussion about the opening sentence. Adoring nanny (talk) 12:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

As i already stated my edit was not WP:BOLD so stop referring to BRD as the "B" did not take place. My edit summary is fine as i was explaining the revert not the original edit. Also, not sure what you mean by which talk page discussion had the suggestion to change the lead, but check some of the most recent messages at the bottom on there and you'll find it. Please move discussion to the talk page now. Xoltered (talk) 12:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

But it was. Even if someone suggested something on the talk page, it was still WP:BOLD. Look, I'm not trying to be a dick here. I am trying to help you understand how Wikipedia policy sees this. You are a relatively new editor, and WP:DONTBITE applies. However, it starts to become concerning if the new editor (in this case, you) shows repeated resistance to understanding how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Admins are not going to be mad at you for making a mistake, especially as a new user. But if, when someone points it out to you, you keep pushing a justification that doesn't fit, that can be another matter. I am still NOT headed to a drama board. Yet. But by repeatedly trying to say that something is not what it is, you are building a case for any user who may later decide to do so. Do you really want to do that? Adoring nanny (talk) 13:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

You clearly have nothing to say other than trying to threaten me, perhaps you should consider why you have sanctions on related topics instead of falsely claiming i do not understand policy and then threatening me. Xoltered (talk) 14:00, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Also if you do, do something like that, remember WP:BOOMERANG Xoltered (talk) 14:08, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:NPA

This is getting steadily worse. This[2] is in WP:NPA territory. Listening is an example of an appropriate response to this type of thing. Here is a terrific example of such a response, from another user with whom I have frequently clashed in the past.[3] However, in part because of the user's terrific response to my note, which in that case was probably in part mistaken, that particular situation did not escalate at all, and I think it's fair to say that my interactions with that user have in general improved. Note in particular, that the user did not construe my dislike of drama boards as a threat, was glad to have the feedback, and gently pointed out the part in which I was probably mistaken, and furthermore did so in a non-accusatory way. A textbook example of how to handle this type of thing in a way that makes things better. I hope the example is helpful. Adoring nanny (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

I never made any personal attack, i simply mentioned your topic ban, that is not a personal attack. Xoltered (talk) 20:23, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

First of all, what TBan are you referring to? I'm not aware of one. Have I missed something? Secondly, the statement You clearly have nothing to say other than trying to threaten me is a personal attack. Per WP:NPA,

Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done.

Also,

Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence

Adoring nanny (talk) 04:54, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Didn't multiple editors mention you having a Tban on the reliable sources noticeboard? Xoltered (talk) 05:06, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, stating my view that you had nothing to say other than threats is not a personal attack. Xoltered (talk) 05:17, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea if editors said I have a TBan or not. If I had one, an admin would have said so on my talk page. Where is the post? Adoring nanny (talk) 12:17, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I can't seem to find it, maybe i was mistaken, or maybe it was removed. Either way, it is not a personal attack even if i was entirely wrong. Xoltered (talk) 21:10, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

It seems what may have occurred is there was a proposed topic ban that i incorrectly thought went through, even so my original point that you should consider why that proposed topic ban was even proposed should be considered. Xoltered (talk) 21:16, 29 January 2022 (UTC)