Laser brain (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
:::{{ping|Laser brain}} you haven't explained why my behavior on this article poor, or how the People v. Turner case qualifies as a dispute. All criminals have genders and all victims have genders. You appear to be threatening to levy for a block if I continue editing the article in any way whatsoever, since you haven't specified what changes you want to see in my editing to the article. Telling someone their editing is unacceptable doesn't instruct them on the specifics of your objection. [[User:Ranze|Ranze]] ([[User talk:Ranze#top|talk]]) 18:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC) |
:::{{ping|Laser brain}} you haven't explained why my behavior on this article poor, or how the People v. Turner case qualifies as a dispute. All criminals have genders and all victims have genders. You appear to be threatening to levy for a block if I continue editing the article in any way whatsoever, since you haven't specified what changes you want to see in my editing to the article. Telling someone their editing is unacceptable doesn't instruct them on the specifics of your objection. [[User:Ranze|Ranze]] ([[User talk:Ranze#top|talk]]) 18:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC) |
||
:::: Your edits reveal an obvious bias toward softening Turner's image and role in the crime and marginalizing the victim. If you honestly believe you are engaging in "neutral truthful editing", you are not. I would advise you to disengage from that article and select topics that have nothing to do with gender-based controversies. Deliberately or not, I don't believe you are capable of editing neutrally in that topic area. The matter is not up for debate. If you continue to make such edit there or at related articles, you will be blocked. You will be able to appeal to [[WP:AE]] in that case. --[[User:Laser_brain|<font color="purple">'''Laser brain'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Laser_brain|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]] 19:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:57, 7 February 2017
This user is a participant in WikiProject Professional wrestling. |
This user is a member of WikiProject Tokusatsu |
- Archives: /2012, /2013, /2014, /2015, /2016
- diffs: Special:Diff/1
- Template:Arbitration enforcement appeal for later
- AMAs/Reddit https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/02/
- Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance also is interesting for avoiding premature speedy deletion nominations
- Wikipedia:REFILL looks very useful for times when I can only post bare URLs due to editing via a crappy tablet.
- Sourcing: Template:Find sources + WP:RS + Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard +Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#List
+Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources aka WP:PW/RS - old Teletoon air dates: ftp://support.crtc.gc.ca/logs/ or http://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/800106c1-0b08-401e-8be2-ac45d62e662e
- redirects per special:diff/743903193 use Wikipedia:Article wizard/Redirect to post at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and log at user:ranze/redirects along with WP:RFD contributions. As clarified December 18 in special:diff/755529610 I can ping Thryduulf if there is a comment to add on RFD.
Rename media requests
{{Rename media}} requests should be placed at the top of file pages, rather than file talk pages. I went ahead and fixed the request you made in regard to File:Lucy of the Southern Rainbow.jpg. Best Regards and Happy New Year, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Gender-based editing
I see that you thought it was a good idea to return to editing at People v. Turner and related articles, despite your visit to WP:AE not long ago when you were editing there. This article falls under discretionary sanctions for gender-related disputes and controversies, and I consider your editing to be agenda-driven and unacceptable. Given the number of times and places we've had to deal with your behavior problems already, you can expect a lengthy block if you continue. --Laser brain (talk) 02:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Laser brain: in special:diff/729932574 I was told restrictions on gender-based editing as a result of Gamergate (which the Turner case has nothing to do with) ended 10 months ago.
- The only agenda I have is neutral truthful editing. Not reaching the same conclusions doesn't mean either of us has any malicious agenda. Ranze (talk) 09:10, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Your topic ban expired. But discretionary sanctions are active for gender-based disputes and controversies and you can be sanctioned at any time for poor behavior in that topic area. You've had your warning. --Laser brain (talk) 15:07, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Laser brain: you haven't explained why my behavior on this article poor, or how the People v. Turner case qualifies as a dispute. All criminals have genders and all victims have genders. You appear to be threatening to levy for a block if I continue editing the article in any way whatsoever, since you haven't specified what changes you want to see in my editing to the article. Telling someone their editing is unacceptable doesn't instruct them on the specifics of your objection. Ranze (talk) 18:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Your edits reveal an obvious bias toward softening Turner's image and role in the crime and marginalizing the victim. If you honestly believe you are engaging in "neutral truthful editing", you are not. I would advise you to disengage from that article and select topics that have nothing to do with gender-based controversies. Deliberately or not, I don't believe you are capable of editing neutrally in that topic area. The matter is not up for debate. If you continue to make such edit there or at related articles, you will be blocked. You will be able to appeal to WP:AE in that case. --Laser brain (talk) 19:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)