User talk:HumanxAnthro/Archive 11

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Notice of redirect discussion
I moved an article you created, List of accolades received by folklore, to List of accolades received by Folklore. I also nominated the one with the lower case, now a redirect, for deletion. You can see the listing at today's date. Shuipzv3 (talk) 14:25, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of List of accolades received by Folklore for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of accolades received by Folklore is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of accolades received by Folklore until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished. Ippantekina (talk) 07:55, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

December 2023
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Bbb23 (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I stand by everything that I said and will not apologize or repent. User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 20:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * @Bbb23 This is actually their second 72 hour block, for essentially the same behavior, since September. Above seems to suggest every indication we should expect more in the future. -- ferret (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * My fault. I misread the block log. Thanks,, for increasing the block to indefinite.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Indef
Since your response to being blocked for personal attacks and harassment was "I stand by everything that I said and will not apologize or repent." you've made it quite clear that you are completely unwilling to abide by Wikipedia's policies and edit in a collegial manner with other editors. Since this is a collaborative project, that kind of attitude is not acceptable here. Since you've clearly stated you refuse to edit in that manner and believe personal attacks are perfectly fine, then there is no more to discuss here and you are not welcome on the project. Canterbury Tail talk 20:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The ones who refuse to follow Wikipedia's principles of "Sources write articles" as Serge and Paul obviously are should be the ones not welcome here, but of course you punish the editor who contributed so much and simply called a spade a spade. I have never vandalized one page in my life and I am the one that gets the axe. I hope you are aware what you have done. User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 20:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * What next? Are you going to punish users that call out editors that replace entire articles with "Atlantic Records sucks" and let the vandals off the hook because they presented the reason for their vandalism in a nice way? This is what Wikipedia is coming to and what they are doing. User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 21:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm very aware of what I've done thanks. You clearly iterated you were unwilling to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and don't see anything wrong with how you treat other editors, therefore you are not are not compatible, as explained above. And this is about you, not about other people. Now I'm a firm believer in indefinite does not mean permanent, but this means you'll need to convince the community that there will be no repetition of your personal attacks, harassment or battleground mentality again before they agree to unblock you in order to regain your editing rights. Canterbury Tail talk 21:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * SIghs*.... just.... give me a couple of weeks and I'll... see if I decide to unblock request.
 * User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 12:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Canterbury Tail talk 20:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * For what its worth, as a content writer myself, I would have also been very annoyed if someone had dismembered an article I had worked on to that extent. Your first edit summary is probably around the same tone as what mine would have been.  is perhaps slightly too far, but if the editor had gone to ANI based on just that, I think most would have understood you. This load of nonsense, on the other hand...
 * You can shake your fists all you want, but the simple fact is that your tirade was far more disruptive than the edits of the other editor, who was acting in good faith and with good intentions, however misplaced. Wikipedia exists, and continues to exists, because people decided to work together. This site is about collaboration, and if you don't want to partake in that, don't bother with the unblock request. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * To add to this, I think I was a little too harsh to this user's article contributions for Army Men: Sarge's Heroes. They weren't inherently bad, I just thought the detail could be cut down but ended up going a little overboard. I also don't usually edit videogames so I wasn't sure what their expectations are for what qualifies as a quality article. I usually edit in current events and year articles where conciseness is key more than in other communities. If @HumanxAnthro gets an opportunity to be ublocked, I support it. PaulRKil (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Unblock request

 * Having blocked HxA as a result of the AN discussion alluded to, I've been following along, and am very pleasantly surprised by the tenor of this unblock request. It's difficult to analyze one's own mistakes, and HxA has gone above and beyond at looking at a series of unacceptable remarks, identifying the problem, and committing to no recurrence. And, in the circumstances that immediately led to this, I do have a bit of sympathy, along the lines of what AirshipJungleman said above: Many users would react poorly in this situation, probably including myself; the issue here is the extreme degree it went to. That said, we are still talking about two blocks, 3 months apart, for very similar behavior, and the way we usually deal with that is escalating blocks. What would you say to commuting this to two weeks from time-of-block, with the understanding that any future block for incivility or personal attacks will likely be indef, and will likely not be so easily appealed? --  Tamzin  &#91;cetacean needed</i>&#93; (they&#124;xe&#124;she) 22:55, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I have a personal policy of always letting other admins handle unblocks as it gives another perspective on things that I don't wish to muddy. As I've mentioned previous and been very vocal about, I don't believe indefinite blocks are permanent if the editors in question can genuinely look at why they were blocked and understand why the behaviour was unacceptable. I was personally gladdened to see the above unblock request. I leave it entirely in your hands Tamzin and I pass no judgement on your decision. <b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b> <i style="color: Blue;">talk</i> 03:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, CT. Given that a commutation today has the same effect as a commutation a few days from now, I'll give this a day or two more in case anyone else would like to comment. -- Tamzin  &#91;<i style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</i>&#93; (they&#124;xe&#124;she) 03:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 19:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Since your unblock request above has been accepted I just wanted to add this commentary. You stepped back and actually did appear to realize what you did and why it was not acceptable. Very few people are capable of such introspection. As a result I fully support this unblocking of you and a resumption of your editing in the new year. I hope you understand now why I took the action that I did, and I hope this makes you a better editor in the future. Happy holidays and new year. <b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b> <i style="color: Blue;">talk</i> 19:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * A very good unblock request, all things considered. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I wanted to add my point of view in this thread as well as I was the one who initially reported the user. I admit think I was a little too harsh to this user's article contributions for Army Men: Sarge's Heroes. They weren't inherently bad, I just thought the detail could be cut down but ended up going a little overboard. I also don't usually edit videogames so I wasn't sure what their expectations are for what qualifies as a quality article. I usually edit in current events and year articles where conciseness is key more than in other communities. If HA gets an opportunity to be unblocked, I support it. PaulRKil (talk) 13:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you! User:HumanxAnthro ( Banjo x Kazooie ) 20:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)