User talk:Cnilep/Archive/31 October 2022

Nomination of Syntactic expletive for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Syntactic expletive, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Syntactic expletive until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring of RAS Syndrome
I was asked to take it to the talk page to reach a resolution with. That did absolutely no good as he kept ignoring my points, pretending as if I never made them, and reverting my edits regardless.

If you read the thread on the RAS talk page I think you'd see I've made a solid case for it not being a redundant acronym. 97.112.217.211 (talk) 02:37, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * If you want to discuss the warning, you should do that on your talk page. If you want to dicuss the article, you should do that on the article talk page. Spreading this to multiple talk pages will not accomplish anything, and again you need to cease with the personal attacks. - w o lf  02:46, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I literally (mis)remembered reading your name as somewhere at some point.
 * Can you not even conceive that you're incorrect here? 97.112.217.211 (talk) 02:52, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not, I believe you already knew that, but regardless, you know it now. And no, I don't believe I'm incorrect. But again, content changes are not based on opinion, but on sourcing, as has been explained to you, ad nauseam. You need to self to self-revert. - w o lf  03:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I understand your concern. As a matter of Wikipedia policy, however, the edit warring must stop regardless of who is right or wrong with regard to the underlying matter. As a matter of personal psychology, it is rarely effective to continue insisting the same thing once your interlocutor has rejected the claim. Take a short break, then come back to discuss further. Cnilep (talk) 02:49, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the input. Being gaslit like this is really stressing me out.  I hope it comes to a conclusion sooner rather than later. 97.112.217.211 (talk) 02:57, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Cnilep is 100% correct. You need to self-revert, and find a policy-based reason to remove that entry, or leave it be, and just try to live with it. You are not being "gas-lit", and if this site stresses you out that much, maybe you should find something else to do, that you would enjoy more. - w o lf  03:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Cnilep, just wanted to thank you for stepping and putting the brakes on all the activity. Everything seems calm now and hopefully it will either stay way, or if there is further debate, it will be kept to the article talk page, collaborative and policy-based. (fingers crossed) Anyway, thanks again - w o lf  05:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)