User talk:Halo Jerk1/User:Pass a Method

Rejection of WP:BRD[edit]

Here are my thoughts - feel free to include them in the text:

One of Pass a Method's problematic habits involves a rejection of WP:BRD. Now, I realise that is only an essay, but it is a widely accepted one, and Pass a Method's complete disregard of it is troubling.

I had a run-in with Pass a Method in February 2013 regarding some disambiguation pages: David (disambiguation), Jonah (disambiguation), Abraham (disambiguation) and Eve (disambiguation). They all followed the same pattern of editing. For example, Pass a Method, made a bold edit[1], I reverted it[2] with the edit summary "Not necessary or helpful for a disambiguation page", and then - instead of starting a talk page discussion, Pass a Method reverted me with the edit summary "Why not?"

Here is another example, from August 2012. PaM makes an edit [3], which wasn't too bad in itself. I reverted it[4], and instead of starting a discussion, PaM reverted me again.[5]

Or take Sodom and Gomorrah in October 2012. PaM added content, including a reference,[6] but the claim wasn't in the reference. I reverted it[7], and instead of starting a talk page discussion (demonstrating, for example, that it was in the source provided), PaM reverted my edit with the edit summary "rv, it is in the source".[8] I reverted him again[9] and started a talk page discussion[10] to which he never replied.

There has been similar editing at Joseph (son of Jacob) and Daniel.

Also, Pass a Method is not above blatant vandalism, as evidence by this edit ("bright").

Hope all this helps. St Anselm (talk) 04:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeppers. He reverts 99.9% of the time. Providing your backstory on your experience with his reverting habits is appreciated. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 01:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He just keeps behaving this way. Here is an example today of reverting but refusing to discuss. St Anselm (talk) 20:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Halo, have you ever had an IQ test? Pass a Method talk 22:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well now, you couldn't have asked that question because I said yeppers since that would be silly, especially since you have such a profound love for informal wording/slang. And you couldn't have asked that question because of how well I edited Wikipedia using different IPs when fixing crap and getting on your back about your craptastic edits. So you must have questioned my IQ because I'm working with StAnselm, who you see as an enemy, and since I'm calling out your bullshit on a grand scale for all to see. How predictable of you, to lash out with a WP:Personal attack because people are calling out your bullshit. And don't patronize me by saying it wasn't a personal attack either. So, yeppers, thanks for giving me ammo to launch at you. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 05:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]