User talk:86.174.76.28

December 2022
 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Peter Maxwell Davies) for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. 331dot (talk) 14:11, 30 December 2022 (UTC) I have blocked you from the article for which you seem to have a dispute only. Please use the talk page to discuss the dispute. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Obviously you didn't bother to actually look at the edit I made, did you? 86.174.76.28 (talk) 14:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Whether you are correct with your edit is irrelevant. Being correct is not a defense to edit warring, as everyone thinks their edits are correct. You must discuss your dispute. 331dot (talk) 14:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * And users giving you a warning are not "trolls". 331dot (talk) 14:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * So, you didn't look at the edit. And yet you have undone it. Article quality is not something you find important, is it? 86.174.76.28 (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I did look at it, and again, you thinking the edit is correct is not a justification for edit warring. Please appeal the partial block if you feel I made an error. 331dot (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You looked at it, so you claim, and despite having no opinion that you have been able to express about it, you undid it. Article quality is not something you find important, is it? 86.174.76.28 (talk) 14:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Most people who are edit-warring are convinced they're right. That, however, is not justification for disrupting articles with repeated reverts, or for making changes without finding consensus on the article talkpage. Go to the talkpage, and politely make your case. That is what is expected of you, not attacks on other editors or demands that administrators adjudicate content.  Acroterion   (talk)   14:33, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I see no evidence that anybody has actually comprehended what I did. Nobody has outlined any rational objection to it. If people revert edits purely to cause disruption, the problem lies with them. And yet, you are attacking me. Why? 86.174.76.28 (talk) 14:41, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No, we're explaining how things are done around here. They're not done by doing the same thing over and over until somebody gives up, accompanied by snarky complaints. You are expected to explain why you think material should be removed. If others agree, it will go. We have discussion pages for a reason. Use them. You could have made your case in half the text you've used to complain that others aren't doing your bidding, calling them "trolls," etc.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I explained why I made the edit when I made it. Nobody has outlined any coherent reason for disagreeing. I see no evidence that anyone has even comprehended what I did. Those who reverted it have done so purely to be disruptive. But you would rather attack me. Why? 86.174.76.28 (talk) 15:03, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I see no evidence that you used the talkpage - what is self-evident to you is not universally perceived by others. If you keep treating other editors as opponents to be defeated, or just plain stupid, you will lose editing privileges entirely. You are not the one who sets the terms, learn how the encyclopedia operates.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Nobody has outlined any reason why my edit should not have been made. People reverted it purely to be disruptive. But you are spending your time attacking me. Why? 86.174.76.28 (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Disagreement is not disruption. You were disruptive by edit warring. The edit history clearly shows the reason the other user articulated. I get the sense you aren't new at this. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Other users reverted my edits without any attempt to explain why. But it's me you attack. Why? And what reason do you think anyone articulated? And apparently you don't realise that if one does not have an account, one's edits appear under frequently changing IP addresses. 86.174.76.28 (talk) 15:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)