Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:11, 1 January 2020

User talk:Bold Clone/Archive 1

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bold Clone. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Guardians of the Galaxy (1969 team), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ravagers. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bold Clone. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bold Clone. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

February 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Stranger Things; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- /Alex/₂₁ 07:53, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

3RR

Hey, could you elaborate on this comment? It sounds a lot like you are accusing me of violating 3RR. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. I reverted the IP’s edit, called him out for edit warring, and accused you of “mindlessly reverting”.

That was an over-reaction on my part, but I won’t apologize for it. Here’s why—You insist that because my edit is disputed, I stop and go to committee, ‘’yet you refuse to join that same discussion.’’ The same goes for that IP I reverted. What disappointing hypocrites you two are!

If you disagree with my edits, then the burden is on ‘’you’’ to voice your opinions on the talk page, not me. If you cannot do that then simply put you do not have the right to come in and enforce a “wait and discuss” policy when you yourself refuse to discuss the very issue you are disputing. I have already said my part in the discussion, and it is your responsibility to continue the discussion. Don’t come in and automatically reverting whatever is in conflict. If you want to begin a conversation, then the burden is on you to do so. If you want to continue a conversation, then the burden is also on you to do so. I’ll be waiting on the talk page for you. —Bold Clone 16:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I wasn't "mindlessly reverting" anything, the onus is on the people edit warring to have the discussion, and I will contribute to that if I feel like it. My edit was about restoring the article to the WP:STATUSQUO and pointing out that you had violated 3RR and needed to stop edit warring. I suggest you stop editing this issue until consensus at the talk page is found, and if I feel like I can contribute to that discussion then I will at that time. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Bogus. You weren't thinking. You weren't arguing. You weren't debating. You were upholding the status quo simply for the sake of the status quo. In other words, mindlessly reverting. You could apparently be bothered to butt in and enforce the status quo through rules-mongering, but not enough so to actually get your hands dirty and debate the issue. I had already contributed to the discussion, but the IP involved refused to participate. I held off for a week to see if anyone, IP or otherwise, had anything else to say about the matter. Apparently not. If the matter isn't really controversial enough to merit a debate, then I am just going to restore the material and work from there. --Bold Clone 04:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Communication with other editors

When communicating with other editors, please do so via talk pages. not in edit summaries. Techhnically, the edits that you are making at Jessica Jones (season 3) constitute edit-warring and you could be blocked for it, even though you haven't breached the three-revert rule yet. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:18, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads-up. I appreciate it. --Bold Clone 20:20, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Says thank you. Continues to do it. 61.68.89.154 (talk) 02:31, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

You know how it is. It's so tempting to get the last word in. And I really did have something constructive to add to the page (unlike the other guy). --Bold Clone 18:27, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Thirteen (Transformers)

The article Thirteen (Transformers) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable fictional topic

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Thirteen (Transformers) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thirteen (Transformers) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Thirteen (Transformers) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 00:27, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

You might want to consider stop digging

You have reverted me a total of 5 times now, and I am starting to sense that you are moving yourself towards an noticeboard discussion about this - something I would prefer not happen to you. I am not addressing article subject matter discussions; they can happen on the article discussion page, as they have been. It was a bold edit to add the bit in the first place, so the burden is on the addition of the information and not the person removing the unsupported info. Please, consider your next move very carefully. Use the discussion page instead of using the edit summary a a bully pulpit. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 20:11, 1 January 2020 (UTC)