User talk:86.175.138.177

Probably not the right approach
Hello. This warning is inappropriate as well as untrue. My respectful but strong advice would be to remove it and open a discussion on the article's Talk page instead. In that discussion I would address your concern about the content but I would emphatically not refer to the other editor's conduct as VANDALISM. That term has a very specific meaning around here - your usage of it is SO far off that the other editor would be justified in asking you to apologize. Please do not do this. Thank you, and I hope this helps. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello. Thank you for the reply. What you describe is honestly, seriously, really, a content dispute - not vandalism, defacement, or anything much else along those lines. Someone changing an article to something with which you disagree is not a definition of vandalism as we describe it here - please check the link. Another hint: have a look at that user's contributions and note when they were last here editing! I'm not sure you are going to hear from them in a hurry, so your edit may well stand for some time. For ever, perhaps? (To be honest, I wouldn't have put anything on their Talk page for that reason too - let sleeping dogs lie, etc.) With regard to your "official complaint", I honestly wouldn't bother; in addition I don't understand what "now more than ever y " means there - you mean you are even angrier with this absent editor now that a third party has suggested you dial it down a bit? I honestly don't get it. I will watch with interest to see what happens next, and I wish you Happy Editing. I still think you should visit the Teahouse (see below). If I can help please say so. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, no thanks. Please do not edit on my Talk page any further. Happy Editing. DBaK (talk) 20:57, 28 February 2017 (UTC)