User talk:2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D

February 2019
Hello, I'm Dorintosh. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to User talk:Yankees10— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Dorintosh (talk) 18:43, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * It was important and constructive. Please explain what was not constructive. See WP:TPO. If I am wrong, maybe User:EEng or User:SMcCandlish  can explain why it was ok for Dorintosh to delete my talk page comment from another user's page saying it did not appear constructive. I don't want to edit war, but I don't understand why Dorintosh is deleting that comment of mine.

Also - I do not understand why you then followed my edits and reverted this completely appropriate edit I had made. Please explain this edit. You deleted appropriate material I had added. And you changed an edit that conformed with MOS (the lower case l). --2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * You need to 1) Register yourself for a proper Wikipedia account. 2) Stop wasting anti-vandalism account holders' time. 3) Learn proper command of the English language. Hope this helps. Dorintosh (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''Your edits have distracted anti-vandalism users excessively. Please stop immediately.'' Dorintosh (talk) 19:37, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * I have not harassed anyone. Where have I done that? Please explain. Also, I do not think it is appropriate for you to use Huggle tools to leave me a baseless warning.

In addition, you just deleted my comment from an article talk page. Worse - you did it using tools (obviously, my comment was not vandalism). That is not OK.

And just now you followed my edits and again using tools you reverted my perfectly good edit here. 2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. ''I sincerely regret your inability to understand the nuances of the Huggle program and its fantastic ability to rapidly tackle vandalism on the Wikipedia platform. I do most sincerely hope that your calling on both users User:EEng and User:SMcCandlish will clarify your foggy opinion on this matter and finally stop this debacle which is preventing me from reverting a rather large amount of vandalism which has been added to the platform since starting this reply.

Dorintosh (talk)'' Dorintosh (talk) 20:27, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

There is no requirement for anyone to register. I have no opinion about this IP's edits - yet - since I have not reviewed any. But when you pound the table demanding they get an account it immediately makes me wonder whether your table-pounding on the other matters is really appropriate. It is quite possible this IP is indeed a vandal - I haven't looked - but there is no requirement that they register. If you know of a policy that says otherwise, please educate me! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, and I don't understand why Dorintosh removed the IP's talk page posts. EEng 23:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Moved here from talk for TPG
-- Where do I go -- Hi. Where do I go to get help if an editor is deleting my talk page comments, and comments on third editor's talk pages, for no legitimate reason? And doing it using Huggle and Twinkle? I tried talking to him, but that has not helped .. he just followed me and reverted perfectly good edits in response, and told me I did not speak English well, and gave me a warning. I can't tell where to go to get help. Thanks. Perhaps one of you or user:drmies has an idea where I should go. Thanks again. --2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I will try to help you but I need to see "Diffs" of your additions, or the other parties deletions. PS  pinging you with template since the OP tried to get your attention. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:44, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks.


 * 1. I left this comment on a third user's talk page. Dorintosh deleted it. Using Huggle. No edit summary reason. And there was no good reason to delete it.


 * 2. I next added this text, which is in the ref that follows the text, to an article. He followed me to the article. Dorintosh deleted it. Using Huggle. No edit summary reason. And there was no good reason to delete it.


 * 3. I tried throughout to speak to Dorintosh. About the incidents I describe above and below. Including on his talk page. You can see how that went. He did not give any substantive explanations for his deletions.


 * 4. And I tried to speak to Dorintosh on my talk page where he had left a message. You can see how that went. He did not give any substantive explanations for his deletions. And instead of describing his responses it may be best for you to read them.


 * 5. He also responded by leaving me warnings on my talk page that were not proper.


 * 6. I also tried to leave word on an article talk page. His response was to delete my post on the article talk page. Using Twinkle. No edit summary.


 * 7. I then made this proper change at an article. He followed me to the article. And reverted it. Using Huggle. No edit summary. No proper reason to revert.


 * I'm frustrated. I've tried speaking to him. He just keeps on doing the same thing. Is ANI the right place for this? This is now a chronic problem. This editor is misusing tools. He's not discussing matters properly - his "discussion" doesn't qualify, even to the small amount that he does sometimes respond. And his real responses are following me, more reverts without reason, using tools the whole time, and leaving warnings that have no reason behind them. If you cannot get him to understand he is wrong in all this behavior, them because this is chronic maybe ANI is the right place? 2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

I have reviewed very few edits. In fact the only thing I looked at was the Minor League vs Minor league. You asked a proper question at article talk. I asked for an answer at article talk also. I want to emphasize that I have no opinion (good or bad) about any of your other edits because I just have not looked. And I'm not taking sides. I don't know how to capitalize Minor league/League. But I do think you deserve an answer to the question on that one edit and if the other user keeps being rude any not answering, the yes, I would complain at ANI on the basis of WP:DISRUPTSIGNS. Good luck. Here is a test.... User:2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D and. Did you get one notification or two? If you only got one, then your past efforts to get other eds attention using for example User:NewsAndEventsGuy are not working. Instead to generate a notification in my feed (or anyone else's) use "Ping" e.g.,. If you're still having trouble in a day or two, I can't promise to wade through a jungle of quicksand but I will be glad to give a quick bit of help. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:15, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Clean hands
Since you're contemplating an ANI, here is a tip you probably don't know about. Today you are changing your talk page comments AFTER I replied. No worries, I don't care. HOWEVER.... that is considered a no no. See the WP:TPG under editing your own comments to "change the meaning". If you want to do that, the best form is to ask any replying editors first. If you change your own comments after replies with someone during a dispute, or at ANI, then you run risk of a WP:BOOMERANG complaint. Again, I'm not irked, just trying to help you avoid landmines. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I did not make any substantive changes.  Just copyediting changes. Fixing a misspelling, and numbering paragraphs, and adding the ping notification you mentioned mostly. Nothing was made intending to change the meaning. I think that is pretty clear if anyone looks at the changes and by my edit summary. Thanks though. --2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 23:34, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

appropriate pinging
BTW, as you probably know, but just in case you do not.... when you use Ping, be sure its for an appropriate use, as yours seem to be here. Down the road, in a content dispute, if you are someday tempted to ping for support, beware of WP:CANVASSING, in case you haven't seen that rule yet. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:40, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Yes, those editors are all editors I dont know, who have made substantial edits to the topic or who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics). --2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 23:43, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I think I should go to ANI now. I've spoken to him so many times, and he just got more aggressive and insulting and followed me all over wikipedia and showed no interest in real discussion in his edits. I have left most of his incorrect reverts alone, and they are just building up in number. I really need someone to put a stop to this so I can edit without him disrupting even more. --2604:2000:E010:1100:A1C9:3376:1282:532D (talk) 23:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * ANI is for problems which are either urgent or chronic. This is neither., maybe there's been some misunderstanding, but can you explain what's going on? EEng 00:01, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I would agree with EEng, but I would add "not yet". If the other ed does not respond in a day or two after you tried to talk them, just restore your article edits.  You might indicate in the edit sum that it is a re-revert after you tried to engage D in [{WP:BRD]] and the other ed did not reply.  That will reduce chance anyone else (maybe the other ed) will later claim you are edit warring without attempting BRD.  If they revert again without explanation, in my view you would have better evidence of a "chronic" problem behavior problem.   Reverting but not engaging in discussion is classic disruptive editing.  But I agree with Eeng that you should go around this merry-go-round 2x or better 3x before formal complaint NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2019 (UTC)