There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Hello, LGBT parenting article
Hi, can you please look at my talk points in the LGBT parenting article. I see you deleted my work and I want to dialog about this. Hope to hear from you soon.184.108.40.206 (talk) 20:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Roscelese, it concerns me to find that you have been told in July not to remove someone's edits without discussing it in the talk page, but this is exactly what you did to me on my edit with Mark Regnerus. I am very new to wiki pedia but find it to be a wonderful resource. However there are things that I'm experiencing from your editing practices that seem to break the rules of Wikipedia. I don't want to message bomb you with too many accusations, but I can give you specifics if you'd like to dialog about this, I think it would be best. I can see from looking at various posts from you that you are passionate about Wikipedia and you think it's important. But I have to say, you seem like a bully to me. I'm not just talking about the Regnerus edit, but also some unfair behavior toward my edits while I was just an ip address under LGBT Parenting. - that's me as the one trying to appropriately cite the controversy with LGBT parenting. I do agree with you as you say, we need not "teach the controversy"
Partly because of my desire to work this out, (and partly because I plan to get more active in lots of other articles, too), I signed up formally and became a registered user, otherwise I sense that just ip addresses are considered somewhat second class citizens around here. Plus there would be no way that you could contact me if you wished to. So here I have offered an olive branch. But as you can tell, I have views that are different than yours, but I don't think you should use your longevity of tenure here to push me around and marginalize and delete my properly cited additions, even in those articles that you are obviously very passionate about.
Would you like to work this out, somehow? It might be better for us to come to consensus and work collaboratively on some un-related project so that we can use our relative strengths to help each other make Wikipedia a better place. Who knows, we might even become online friends. But I think we have to resolve what I think is a conflict. So I will leave this note for you here and I warmly invite you to a discussion with me.
I have to be honest... I am a white, male, republican, conservative, heterosexual, roman catholic. But I still deserve dignity and respect, right?
Also, as I learn more and more by the minute here on Wiki, I want to assure you that I am just a new user and I have never have been on Wikipedia before. the reason I say this is because I was reading in the administrative arbitration section about the terrible time you and others have had with that user who is now banned. I'll just go on my way and get some other editing experience with other articles but yes it still stings a little of how I was treated.Cityside189 (talk) 06:18, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
ATTN Mediation Case
Hi, I am the mediator for a case that you were listed in, please come to this page:
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Thanks The Editor of All Things Wikipedia 《Talk》 08:33, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:9061:3800:F4C4:E64B:61B1:60B4 (talk) 07:14, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Transphobia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Refused medical care (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Note and request
I've unblocked User:Cityside189 contingent on a 1-way interaction ban with you. Per User talk:Cityside189#Unblocking. This is a 1-way ban, so you are not subject to any constraints. But 1-way bans are tricky (some would say impossible), and it would help admins enforce it if you make an effort to keep your distance from them where possible. Re-reading this I already realize how murky this is; hopefully you understand what I'm trying to get at? I mean if he shows up at an article you've been editing, you don't need to walk away or anything, but please don't revert him if you accidentally run across him at Underwater basketweaving or something. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Of course. I've been the unrestricted party in one-way interaction bans before, and I know not to go looking for the person, because that ends up being baiting. On the other hand, I strongly suspect that the user is a sock of someone I've interacted with before, based on his comments to me, and I doubt your unblock will last very long. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:05, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big-Endians (talk • contribs) 22:08, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Teamwork Barnstar|
|Your work and dedication to Wikipedia is appreciated. Marshan3q (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC)|