User talk:CC8200

Welcome!
Hi CC8200! I noticed your contributions to Talk:Wings of Fire (novel series)&#32;and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Happy editing! —MEisSCAMMER (scam) 02:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

February 2023
Hi CC8200! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Wings of Fire (novel series) several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree&#32;at, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:53, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Bro thats exactly what I did 💀 why you leaving messages on my talk page when your the one who reverted my edit CC8200 (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Because you have stated your itnention to continue edit warring, which will most likely result in you getting blocked if you continue to do so. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:57, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I stated my intention to stop your vandalism to the page by removing information for no reason CC8200 (talk) 17:59, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Read what they linked, your information is considered WP:Fancruft, it will only interest people who are fans of the series, and is (somewhat) inappropriate on Wikipedia. Happy Editing! -I Followed The Username Policy (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I did in fact read what he linked, my additions to the article only helped it. What I wrote is correct and important information, so it doesn't matter if only people who are fans of the series will be intrested in it, it is simply important and correct information that needed to be added. CC8200 (talk) 18:44, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for a history of disruptive editing, edit warring, battleground behaviour and personal attacks that resulted in blocks of your IPs which continue with this account. 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:. Ponyo bons mots 18:43, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Note from blocking admin: There was no checkuser use involved in this block; the IP range I mention is obvious if you look through the editors contribs and the edit history of the related articles.-- Ponyo bons mots 20:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * "If you go back in the talk page, you can see they never respond to me addressing this" No, you simply just refused to accept my explanation. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:53, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect, I told you that the information was important and how it was important, and you responded with "Wikipedia is not meant to cover every single little thing about a subject, that's what Fandom is for.", ignoring the fact that I specifically told you that the information was not a "little thing", and actually a huge part of the story. CC8200 (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I then responded to you AGAIN by saying "Man you just really aren't listening, are you? Something that is covered by NEARLY HALF THE BOOKS IN THE SERIES is not a "little thing". You never responded to this. CC8200 (talk) 19:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You then proceed to ignore me again by saying "much to the annoyance of those who absolutely must have every little detail recorded in the article) but it's not always easy." AGAIN you call it a "little detail". This is just annoying because first of all, having not read the books, you have no idea what is or isn't a little detail, and second of all, you are ignoring someone who's knowledge on the subject far exceeds yours. CC8200 (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to understand what a "figure of speech" is. It doesn't matter whether or not it's covered in half of the books, not everything belongs in a Wikipedia article. For example, I could say that the BMW M3 GTR from Need for Speed: Most Wanted has appeared as a purchasable car in multiple games after it's debut, and that would still be WP:CRUFT despite having been in more than one game. ― Blaze WolfTalk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 19:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

My point is that the information belonged in the article, as it was very important. You are comparing this to something no one cares about, like a BMW appearing in video games. I completely understand that not everything belongs in a Wikipedia article, but I believe that this does. Having not read the books yourself, it is unjust for you to automatically assume that you know better than I do. It's a very important piece of information that isn't fancruft, it's just an important piece of information that belongs in the article. CC8200 (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * "You are comparing this to something no one cares about, like a BMW appearing in video games" actually you'd be surprised just how many people care that this specific version of the car has appeared in multiple games, but that's besides the point. Yes I haven't read the books, however I've dealt with a lot of fan cruft in the 2 years I've been here. Specific details or examples like what you added are completely inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Let's take part of your edit for an example. You added "(save the NightWings and LeafWings, who both were in hiding until "The Dark Secret" and "The Hive Queen", respectively.)" while removing "With a few exceptions to each rule". "With a few exceptions to each rule" already covers the information you are wanting to add without going into complete detail so that if the reader is that interested they can find other places to find the specific information. ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 20:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I've already said several times, "With a few exceptions to each rule" does not do it justice, as there are way too many exceptions. Saying "With a few exceptions" is almost never enough to cover information. You again suggest that the information is not important by saying "If the reader is that interested". Keeping this information in just adds more detail to the article and again, is important information that I think should be left in. it does no harm to anyone, and adds correct and important information to the article. The original reason it was reverted was for messiness, which I fixed, and then you come along and revert it. Clearly you did not go back and see that I had corrected my mistakes. If you had only left a message on the talk page the first time you encountered my edit instead of reverting it, we could have avoided this and come to a compromise. CC8200 (talk) 20:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * "it does no harm to anyone" I've already told you this, just because something doesn't do any harm does not mean it should be added. I reverted solely because it is excessive information that does not belong in the article. This will most likely be my last response to you since I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall. The nutshell of WP:CRUFT says this: "In-universe topics must demonstrate out-of-universe notability." and further expands on the concept of CRUFT saying "The use of the term implies that an editor does not regard the material in question as encyclopedic...because too much detail is present that will bore, distract or confuse a non-fan when its exclusion would not significantly harm the factual coverage as a whole." I also suggest you read WP:DETAIL as well as WP:UNDUE. ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 20:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Same here, talking to you gets me nowhere, as you choose to only respond to one or two of the several things I bring up in each message. You continuously regard the information as excessive and non-important. Let's get something straight. You have not read the books. You are not paying attention to what I am saying. You know nothing of the subject. Your knowledge is far below mine. You do not get to choose whether the information is important or not. Hopefully in the future you will talk to people who actually know what they are doing before you act like an idiot and revert someone's edit for no reason, without bringing it up with them beforehand. Now, I know my unban request will either get ignored or declined, so I'm just going to block evade and vandalize several wikipedia pages under the radar, with minor changes that will make the article incorrect and lead to people being offended at wikipedia and getting wrong information. I've said it once, and I'll say it again. It is unfair idiots get to control the information people are getting. I'm going to make several alt accounts with different ips in different locations, and try to vandalize wikipedia as much as possible. This is gonna be real fun CC8200 (talk) 21:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Have fun getting all your socks blocked then! ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 21:23, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Have fun finding them! CC8200 (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Just so you know, we're not as stupid as you seem to think we are. We will find them and we will block them. ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 21:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

TPA revoked
<div class="user-block" style="background:#ffe0e0; border:1px solid #886644; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height: 40px"> Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. Yamla (talk) 21:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)