User talk:Massmediazealot

Welcome to student editing!
Hello, Massmediazealot, and welcome to Wikipedia!

My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users.

Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. —Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:23, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

February 2023 Block
On February 04, 2023, I was blocked from Wikipedia-editing for 31 hours (by user/volunteer admin "Acroterion") for making "disruptive edits." I appealed it 15 minutes later. 32 minutes after that, the block was extended to 72 hours (by user/volunteer admin "Yamla") for making "personal attacks" in my well-intentioned, well-reasoned appeal. I appealed it again 6 minutes later. 16 minutes after that, the block was extended again to 1 week (by user/volunteer admin "Acroterion"), at which time I was blocked/disabled from editing/accessing my own talkpage too. Smh. (See my block log here.)

All I've ever made on Wikipedia are useful contributions. But, clearly, if you offend an OCD-stricken chronic Wikipedia-er who knows all the cringey tips & tricks of Wikipedia (like how to contact the volunteer-admins on the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page) and who feels triggered about a new editor making contributions on a Wikipedia article that they for some reason feel territorial over, you're the bad guy. Smh.

This chronically online troll was the one trolling me. But calling someone a troll on Wikipedia evidently constitutes a "personal attack," because that's all I called him (a troll)—for good reason—and I got admin-blocked for it. (Btw he 100% started with the personal attacks first.) But of course, since he's been on here for umpteen years and he knows how to niftily contact the glorious volunteer-admins, he's the right one and his false sense of ownership of Wikipedia articles and newcomers gets affirmed. Smfh.

These toxic gatekeepers (i.e., overzealous editors) who have no life beyond Wikipedia-editing make contributing to this site such a drag—even when Wikipedia's own motto is be bold with edits and please do not bite the newcomers. Newcomers are supposedly invited to contribute, but cringey regulars take everything so personally that they will do everything they can to discourage it. They pathetically feel that new editors encroach on their crusty toes.

They follow you around on Wikipedia in bad faith and revert your good-faith edits without reason, and then they play victim as they report you to the volunteer-admins, who quickly block you. Then, defending yourself in your unblock request just extends your block. You are recommended to retract your unblock request rather than wait for it to be reviewed. Sigh. The obnoxiousness is real.

Yes, editing on Wikipedia is stupid and cringey. Taking a walk or making a sandwich are def healthier alternatives. Anything that doesn't involve picking pointless fights on the Internet with cringey societal rejects. But making Wikipedia such a toxic place with all these overzealous, gatekeeping editors who are hostile to young newcomers is really bad form.

The complaining user trolled me with his edits by following me, targeting me and reverting my good-faith work when none of my edits had anything to do with him or were even on pages he ever worked on before. The weirdo just had/has a strange Captain Wikipedia complex. I did not vandalize anything. I did not disrupt anything. I may have made some sarcastic personal attacks toward him in my edit summaries on Talk:Lottery jackpot records, but those were well after his trolling me and spitefully reverting my good edits after I was being respectful and communicative with him for hours/days. He just reverts edits, out of spite, with no cause, with no edit summary, with no consequence. Smh.

I got personal attacks from him and two other (illiterate) trolls in Talk:Lottery jackpot records. Total trolls who refuse to be mature nor thoughtful. Writing in broken English is fine. Writing impulsively without any proofreading is fine. They want to burn me at the stake for taking a couple minutes to improve the structure of the talk page for clarity and readability. I added 2-3 line breaks to their spewing off-topic nonsense and typos, and then all hell breaks loose. Line breaks are soo offensive apparently. Smh. But their out-of-line behavior is somehow given a pass, since they know how to project and play the victim to the volunteer-admins, to get me blocked.

So user/volunteer admin "Acroterion" is right. Wikipedia is a waste of time. The Internet in general is a waste of time. The Internet is a cesspool. Wikipedia that. It's populated by isolated trolls with far too much free time on their hands. So getting off the Internet is def the way to go. Getting along with your day, away from the toxic ass sick ass Internet, is the way to go. But sadly, chronically online Wikipedia-ers do not get this. They need an outlet for their trolling, and anonymous sites like Wikipedia give them that. This site gives powerless ants like them a forum where they can thrive. I bet the volunteer-admins did not issue them temporary blocks for their toxic behavior, like they oh-so-quickly did for me. I had zero malicious intent with my edits/contributions, while they had nothing but malicious intent. I make harmless and innocent edits, in completely good faith, yet the volunteer-admins want to impose obnoxious unwritten outdated rules on me, in the name of "personal attacks" lol 🤦‍♂️

—Massmediazealot (talk) 02:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)