Line 159: | Line 159: | ||
:::[[User:SPECIFICO|SPECIFICO]], if you cannot stay off a user's talk page ''despite being the one to float the idea in the first place'', that's a pretty good sign you should disengage. You are not helping anything with your contributions there. Do something else. [[User:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #ad3e00;">Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs</span>]] <sup><small>[[User talk:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #ad3e00;">talk</span>]]</small></sup> 15:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
:::[[User:SPECIFICO|SPECIFICO]], if you cannot stay off a user's talk page ''despite being the one to float the idea in the first place'', that's a pretty good sign you should disengage. You are not helping anything with your contributions there. Do something else. [[User:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #ad3e00;">Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs</span>]] <sup><small>[[User talk:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #ad3e00;">talk</span>]]</small></sup> 15:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
||
::::That comment strikes me as gratuitous in that it is redundant and unresponsive to any of the substantive issues.[[User:SPECIFICO |<b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b>]][[User_talk:SPECIFICO | ''talk'']] 15:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
::::That comment strikes me as gratuitous in that it is redundant and unresponsive to any of the substantive issues.[[User:SPECIFICO |<b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b>]][[User_talk:SPECIFICO | ''talk'']] 15:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
||
{{ping|David Fuchs|ScottishFinnishRadish}}. I had no interest in prolonging this, and would not be returning here, except that another editor pointed me to look back at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1152164961/next this diff] on IH's talk page. That's a substantive breach of [[WP:TPG]] that would misinform anyone who stumbles on this little flap and tries to decipher the chain of events including whether I violated a request to stay away, misrepresented things to SFR on this page, or any related misimpressions. That's a cardinal rule of talk page threads not to change a post after its been engaged by other editors, and as we often do in such amendments it needs a timestamp added to the additional text or better yet, the addition could be posted separately in normal sequence. I request one of you would address this concern on that page. Thank you.[[User:SPECIFICO |<b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b>]][[User_talk:SPECIFICO | ''talk'']] 16:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:57, 28 April 2023
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
Add to Shaviro Bio
The Steven Shaviro bio has been protected because of harassment. I noticed that you've helped clean it up.
Would you mind adding that there's now a letter of support from his professional colleagues that also includes a very different narrative of the events?
Here's a link to the letter: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfh7_6q7ckSEFsWVtykUeDtMdWdCsWTO5jzyz0KxOpd_1H1bg/viewform?usp=sf_link 72.104.127.129 (talk) 22:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Anything that you want included in the article must have secondary sourcing. If secondary sources cover it, I suggest you open an edit request on the article talk page outlining the exact edit you'd like made with the source. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Question from Jbradleychen (17:32, 16 April 2023)
Hello there! Thank you in advance for helping me participate constructively on Wikipedia. I use Wikipedia all the time, but today am specifically concerned about the page for Immanuel Kant, and how certain material in his biography seems to decontextualize his work in a way that could be misleading.
Rather than simply proposing edits, I thought I should try to understand the community supporting that page first, and the history of the details that interest me. It appears to me that PatrickJWelsh is the most active recent maintainer. I'm hoping you can confirm I am using the history resources properly, and otherwise suggest how to engage constructively on what could be some tricky questions. --Jbradleychen (talk) 17:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Jbradleychen, your best bet is to outline your concerns on the talk page of the article and see what responses you get. After you outline your concerns on the talk page you should expect it to take several days to over a week before other editors respond, so don't be concerned if others don't respond right away. If no one is responding after a week or two WP:BEBOLD and edit the article to address your concerns. That would normally be the first step, but as you seen too think the change might be contentious, I suggest an attempt at discussion first.
- Hopefully this leads you in the right direction. If you have any other questions feel free to reach out. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks - this is very helpful! JBradleyChen (talk) 20:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for helping me get started. I started a discussion on the Talk page in question; you can see it on the Talk page for Immanuel Kant, with some engagement from one of the users supporting the page. After spending some time on the tutorials for new users, I also realized that the edits I want to make are related to a neutral point-of-view concern, so I flagged the relevant section in the article with a POV-section tag.
- I hope I am not being too brash, and that the people who have a stake regarding this material will participate on the Talk page. I am going to try to spend more time this afternoon trying to figure out the editors that contributed to that specific section.
- I'm mentioning this just in case there is a way I could be better aligned with Wikipedia culture or norms. Thanks! JBradleyChen (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Tagging it is reasonable, though if another editor removes the usage I wouldn't replace it at this point. Right now you'll just need to wait for more engagement. Many editors do not edit daily, so it can take some time for a discussion to proceed. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
102.156.104.58
Thank you for blocking the IP. However, WHOIS wasn't working for me at the time I reported, so I only reported the single IP. It is now working for me, and this is actually a resumed range: 102.156.0.0/17. Has already been blocked twice, most recent for 3 months this past December. Seems like a new block on that range may be needed. Magitroopa (talk) 14:54, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Range blocked for six months. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Rahulwiki214
Why did you decline the unblock request for your block?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Because it was so obviously not going to be accepted that I figured I'd save Yamla or 331dot some time. If you'd like I'll revert the decline and leave it for someone else. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, please.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- All set. In the future I'll leave even the obvious ones. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think it's best for you; I don't much care about the blocked editor in this instance. It was a good block, although possibly too lenient, but why open up the potential for trouble for you or the block by declining? It doesn't hurt for it to sit there for a while longer before someone addresses it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Mostly it takes away from someone else's limited time to have to look into something that is obviously not going to be accepted, but I understand that best practice-wise I should stay away from declining unblocks of my own blocks. Was just trying to lighten the burden on the unblock patrollers. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think the reason that some admins patrol unblock requests is because they enjoy it. Therefore, you are depriving them of their favorite dessert. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I probably should look at it that way, although I do plenty of tasks that I don't necessarily enjoy. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think the reason that some admins patrol unblock requests is because they enjoy it. Therefore, you are depriving them of their favorite dessert. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- +1 on too lenient. I was actually going to ask you if you minded if I increased it to indef, but then I noticed the socking. Valereee (talk) 16:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I had looked at their history and it seemed like they may have been trying to edit in good faith originally, and got mad because of the AfD, so I was assuming good faith, and hoping a week would get the point across. Didn't see the socking stuff until after. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- They definitely got mad because of the AfD. :D I'm actually kind of surprised they requested unblock, I thought the vandalism was their going out in a blaze of glory. Valereee (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- There's the indef I could feel was coming. I only have one thing left to say. NOw who is intensely using wrong power , and affecting others genuine person profile, really its bad, i was thinking Wikipedia is fresh genuine platform but i understand some group of people using wrong power game .... please answer me all ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- They definitely got mad because of the AfD. :D I'm actually kind of surprised they requested unblock, I thought the vandalism was their going out in a blaze of glory. Valereee (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I had looked at their history and it seemed like they may have been trying to edit in good faith originally, and got mad because of the AfD, so I was assuming good faith, and hoping a week would get the point across. Didn't see the socking stuff until after. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Mostly it takes away from someone else's limited time to have to look into something that is obviously not going to be accepted, but I understand that best practice-wise I should stay away from declining unblocks of my own blocks. Was just trying to lighten the burden on the unblock patrollers. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think it's best for you; I don't much care about the blocked editor in this instance. It was a good block, although possibly too lenient, but why open up the potential for trouble for you or the block by declining? It doesn't hurt for it to sit there for a while longer before someone addresses it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- All set. In the future I'll leave even the obvious ones. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, please.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
RD2
Can you please RD2 the last edit made by IP 46.11.34.5? Thanks, The Night Watch (talk) 14:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- The naked dude? Is that really RD2 worthy? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Well...nevermind then. I assumed RD2 covered most grossly offensive material, but it appears as though we both invoked the Streisand effect that was said to be avoided at WP:REVDELREQUEST.
The Night Watch (talk) 14:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I just don't see a dude standing around in a non-sexual situation with his wang out as "grossly offensive," and certainly not enough to revdel. Another admin might think differently, though. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- <snickers>...you said "wang".-- Ponyobons mots 16:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- It was the least vulgar but still funny word I could think of. Almost went with dong. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Or maybe pecker?-- Ponyobons mots 17:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Pecker isn't as funny sounding as wang and dong. Pecker is what I call a screw that fell into a difficult to reach place while I was working on something. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I was trying to be classy, with an English accent and all!-- Ponyobons mots 17:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I imagine it's quite a bit classier with the accent, as are most things, unless you have the low class Super Hans accent. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I was trying to be classy, with an English accent and all!-- Ponyobons mots 17:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Pecker isn't as funny sounding as wang and dong. Pecker is what I call a screw that fell into a difficult to reach place while I was working on something. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Or maybe pecker?-- Ponyobons mots 17:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- It was the least vulgar but still funny word I could think of. Almost went with dong. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- <snickers>...you said "wang".-- Ponyobons mots 16:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Clarification requested
How is a username identical to that of a company name (minus spaces) not a blatant violation of the username policy? Wikipedia allows company names now? –Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Generally they'll need to edit based on their name, in a way that makes it clear that they're that company and not just using that name. See WP:CORPNAME,
A user who both adopts a promotional username and who engages in inappropriate advertising or promotional edits or behaviors – especially when made to their own user space or to articles about the company, group, or product – can be blocked from editing Wikipedia, and are often blocked much sooner than users who engage in only one of the two behaviors.
ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)- Noted. I'll wait to see if they edit on behalf of Ted Weggeland again. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Fox News Summary judgement - discussion
I am in need of clarification, are your comments there to be construed as a participant, or as an admin? DN (talk) 03:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC) I bring this up because it is not the first time you have participated in a discussion on a political topic and concurrently acted as an admin, closing RfCs, giving warnings etc. To be clear, this is not an accusation, I am only noticing patterns. Please feel free to alleviate my concerns. Cheers. DN (talk) 04:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- I wouldn't call it administrative, but I expressed no opinion on, nor do I really care one way or another about the question at hand. My concern is that a discussion that is currently at 5 decitomats is growing larger with unconstructive back-and-forths between users. Many of those involved in the discussion have dozens of replies, mostly to each other, which are repeating the same arguments or just plain arguing with each other. In order to achieve consensus on a topic like this we need a focused discussion with significant participation by uninvolved users. That doesn't happen when there are thousands of words repeating the same arguments between the same editors. If someone uninvolved wanted to catch up on the discussion as it stands now it would take roughly an hour just to read the text, nevermind absorbing arguments. It is disrespectful of other editors' time to continue to expand the discussion repeating many of the same arguments, yet expect uninvolved editors to weigh in or an uninvolved editor to assess any consensus and make a close. In contentious topics, or really any heated discussion, it is best to keep things focused because uninvolved editors have limited time to review literal novels worth of arguments and discussions, and without their input it can be very difficult to establish a consensus.
- I have a long history of requesting that people seriously consider adding to a discussion when it would not be productive. I also closed the last enormous Fox News discussion. None of that constitutes involvement in a topic, even in the tightest sense of WP:INVOLVED,
Warnings, calm and reasonable discussion and explanation of those warnings, advice about community norms, and suggestions on possible wordings and approaches do not make an administrator involved.
In your example above, I was attempting to get an editor to see that replying complaining about discussion continuing only continued the discussion, and did not express any views on the topic. I also told people to stop arguing on the talk page and instead take complaints to the right venue. I had also closed an earlier RFC on the laptop, but I don't believe assessing consensus in a discussion makes one involved either, as then we'd have a situation where an administrator who closed a discussion about a topic ban become involved in regards to that user and the topic. You may note that the in ANI thread I linked to my closure of, I also linked to my asking people to seriously consider adding more to the discussion. The closing statement includedasking people to consider if repeated contributions to the discussion would be productive. If anyone believes that makes me too involved for closure, feel free to reopen
and the closure was reviewed at AN. No participant expressed concern about my asking editors to slow their roll and also acting as an uninvolved administrator. - I guess I'm not sure what pattern you're seeing that concerns you? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:31, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Hmm
I saw a post of yours on Wikipediocracy--I assume it was you--with a picture of an old dude with a hat, behind one of these water pitchers they have in conference centers. Is that you? I'm very disappointed: I thought you were young and all that, drinking IPAs in a gentrified bar... Drmies (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- In pretty sure I haven't posted any pictures of myself on wikipediocracy, just pictures of some animals and the bed I made. I'm not an old dude, but I'm certainly not young anymore. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- How old is an old dude?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- Old enough to get a discount, or to sit in McDonald's drinking hot coffee at 2pm when it's 80+ degrees outside. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- I wanted a number. I don't eat at McDonald's. I don't drink coffee, no matter what the temperature is outside, although they say that it's good to drink hot fluids when it's hot. But I do like discounts - of any kind, age-related or otherwise. Some places give discounts to people 50 or over, and yet I'd call 50 middle-aged. For some 20-year-olds 40 looks old, whereas for some 50-year-olds, 60 does not. The good news is, unlike other mere mortals, I don't age, at least not as long as I wear my ring of power.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think people reach old at different ages, depending on what they do and how they behave. I think the the earliest one needs to worry about being old is 60, especially now that we live in the future. Looking at pictures of 50 year olds from the 40s and they look like 70 year olds today. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- It's a pretty common phenomenon - people looking older at a given age in the past than they do now. Probably due to a number of factors, including increased sunscreen usage, decreased smoking, etc. Useight (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- I blame preservatives in food! All I know is that I smoke, seldom wear sunscreen, get sunburned often, and I'm roughly the same age now as my grandfather was in my earlier memories of him, and I look aces compared to how he looked. I might as well still be a child.
- I was out ice fishing last year with my father, and we got to chatting with some younger guys who were on the same pond. I mentioned that I had gone to the same high school they did, and they asked if I graduated in 2017, the year before they started high school. Made me feel good that they were off by almost a couple decades. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- By my calculations, you are probably in your early 40s. At the risk of sounding like a patronizing health freak, I wouldn't be as proud of your bad habits as you seem to be. I tried hard not to graduate high school, but I failed.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not proud of smoking, but I do enjoy it, and I'm a lot more likely to wear sunscreen now than in my younger days. Didn't stop me from getting burned twice already this year, as I thought I should be safe from the sun until at least mid-April. You should also see my fishing hat, it's tremendous. I have enough good, healthy hobbies and habits where I'm sure I'm offsetting some of my bad ones. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- By my calculations, you are probably in your early 40s. At the risk of sounding like a patronizing health freak, I wouldn't be as proud of your bad habits as you seem to be. I tried hard not to graduate high school, but I failed.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- It's a pretty common phenomenon - people looking older at a given age in the past than they do now. Probably due to a number of factors, including increased sunscreen usage, decreased smoking, etc. Useight (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think people reach old at different ages, depending on what they do and how they behave. I think the the earliest one needs to worry about being old is 60, especially now that we live in the future. Looking at pictures of 50 year olds from the 40s and they look like 70 year olds today. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- I wanted a number. I don't eat at McDonald's. I don't drink coffee, no matter what the temperature is outside, although they say that it's good to drink hot fluids when it's hot. But I do like discounts - of any kind, age-related or otherwise. Some places give discounts to people 50 or over, and yet I'd call 50 middle-aged. For some 20-year-olds 40 looks old, whereas for some 50-year-olds, 60 does not. The good news is, unlike other mere mortals, I don't age, at least not as long as I wear my ring of power.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- Old enough to get a discount, or to sit in McDonald's drinking hot coffee at 2pm when it's 80+ degrees outside. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- How old is an old dude?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ooooh, are you talking about my avatar? That is Stephen Root, voice of my spirit animal Bill Dauterive. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:10, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- HA! Stephen Root Vegetable. That's funny. Jip Orlando (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- I thought it was pretty clever, too. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
- HA! Stephen Root Vegetable. That's funny. Jip Orlando (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
Beshogur (talk) 14:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC) |
- Thanks! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Just to let you know
I was unaware of the SPI which now encompasses Volgabulgari. I did, however, post a concern on EdJohnston's talk page. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:12, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't realize I was stepping into it quite so much when I was responding at AIV. Turned out to be a whole thing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Colleen Ballinger on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
TPA needs revoking for this user you blocked. What a unblock request. Thanks! Tails Wx 15:34, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Already done. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
range p-block?
Hey, SFR...I don't understand what this is? I've seen it on multiple of the Indian IPs that are editing around the Tata conglomerate, a complete mess of clearly-UPE sock or meat contributions on dozens and dozens of articles, mostly unsourced updates of things like gross profits, numbers of outlets, etc. (and personally I'd love to see rangeblocks on article space because of it) but I don't understand why these namespaces? Er, this is a "I truly don't know" question, not a "Please explain your reasoning" question. :) Valereee (talk) 11:31, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- Because there was a bunch of disruption to project space by those ranges. Since the range is so broad and it's not all bad editing, I think there's hesitancy to block the entire /22, so it's an attempt to allow some of the mainspace editing while preventing most of the disruption. To be honest, it might end up being a tmobile situation where the whole range is just anonblocked. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Hulk talk
I was surprised to see your intervention at IH's talk page. My statement was not antagonistic. I don't think it was appropriate to remove my response as if it were an attack or anything other than a clarification of what IH appeared not to understand or accept about my first comment. In fact, his "deal" was an example of the kind of strange disconnected participation that I referenced wrt the comments of numerous editors and Admins in the past. SPECIFICO talk 12:05, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- If you say
I have no interest in further participation with you here or elsewhere.
on a user's talk page, and they replyDeal.
then you should probably have no further participation with them, especially on their talk page. Also, if you don't see how a message sayingYour reply was unresponsive to my statement.
after your statement was...your participation is "disruptive" -- your posts are frequently incomprehensible and incoherent, as if you were not fully aware of what you are writing.
would be antagonistic I'm not sure how better to explain to you other than by saying that telling someone their participation is disruptive and frequently incomprehensible and incoherent as if they're not fully aware of what they're writing, then returning to complain that they did not address that after you told them you didn't want to interact with them anymore and they agreed is unnecessarily antagonistic. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:12, 28 April 2023 (UTC)- Don't you think IH is capable of handling their own interactions and talk page? You're entitlled to your interepretation and opinions. That does not mean that my post there was Vandalism, as the link in your edit summary suggests. The reason I returned is because there's been a new development, namely that their appeal if any will apparently be at a different venue at which I will need to reiterate my comment. IH's response to my statement about their longstanding behavioral patterns indicated that IH did not understand what I said. They replied as if I were making some personal gripe about some comments they made about me at two pages. That seemed to me to reflect that they had not considered the many complaints from many editors on their talk archive. I presume you have read their archive before involving yourself in this, so I think you will understand this. IH's appeal if any will be weakened if thtey are not prepared to address that record. SPECIFICO talk 13:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- If you believe that your communication is constructive and welcome at the talk page, go ahead and restore it. I don't plan on edit warring over it, and it was a normal editor action. I'm not sure why you'd think the edit summary labels your edit as vandalism, other than possibly the link to the user script I used to make the edit? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- SPECIFICO, if you cannot stay off a user's talk page despite being the one to float the idea in the first place, that's a pretty good sign you should disengage. You are not helping anything with your contributions there. Do something else. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- Don't you think IH is capable of handling their own interactions and talk page? You're entitlled to your interepretation and opinions. That does not mean that my post there was Vandalism, as the link in your edit summary suggests. The reason I returned is because there's been a new development, namely that their appeal if any will apparently be at a different venue at which I will need to reiterate my comment. IH's response to my statement about their longstanding behavioral patterns indicated that IH did not understand what I said. They replied as if I were making some personal gripe about some comments they made about me at two pages. That seemed to me to reflect that they had not considered the many complaints from many editors on their talk archive. I presume you have read their archive before involving yourself in this, so I think you will understand this. IH's appeal if any will be weakened if thtey are not prepared to address that record. SPECIFICO talk 13:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
@David Fuchs and ScottishFinnishRadish:. I had no interest in prolonging this, and would not be returning here, except that another editor pointed me to look back at this diff on IH's talk page. That's a substantive breach of WP:TPG that would misinform anyone who stumbles on this little flap and tries to decipher the chain of events including whether I violated a request to stay away, misrepresented things to SFR on this page, or any related misimpressions. That's a cardinal rule of talk page threads not to change a post after its been engaged by other editors, and as we often do in such amendments it needs a timestamp added to the additional text or better yet, the addition could be posted separately in normal sequence. I request one of you would address this concern on that page. Thank you. SPECIFICO talk 16:57, 28 April 2023 (UTC)