User talk:Nigario.sss

name
Even if your "nickname has nothing to do with any racial slurs that you Westerners use" you might still want to change it out of common courtesy.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:39, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * First you assault me with name-calling because I disagreed with you. Now you come to my page? You are absolutely an indecent person with absolutely no dignity inside. Nigario.sss (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Looked like an honest and damn good suggestion. Think about it instead of lashing out. Objective3000 (talk) 21:47, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * And it also violates it because it looks like the name of a website.-- Gla xp  21:53, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * And I'm an Australian, not a western.-- Gla xp  21:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Profit.-- Gla xp  21:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not going to change it. Nigario.sss (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I never said to.-- Gla xp  21:58, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

please read this discretionary sanctions alert carefully
Doug Weller talk 08:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I hadn't looked at your edits at Talk:CNN when I placed this. I think I need to emphasise that you need to follow our standards of behavior with all of your edits, edit summaries, etc. Doug Weller  talk 08:30, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you give me an example of my edits that broke any of Wikipedia's policies? Nigario.sss (talk) 09:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Even with looking only briefly at the discussion at Talk:CNN controversies, which I think Doug Weller must have been referring to, my eye was caught by this: "These are the new hawkish liberal Westerners who feel like killing innocent peasants all around the world is good". And "these" refers back to a bolded mention of "like half the people who supported the merger in the discussions above". That would be an example of an unacceptable attack on your fellow editors. Comment on content, not on the contributor, and especially not with such outrageous comments on contributors. If you write anything remotely like that on a Wikipedia page again, you will certainly be blocked. WP:NPA is policy. Bishonen &#124; talk 10:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC).
 * I am sorry, but you are steight up lying. The liberal hakish comment had nothing to do with wikipedians, and you've managed to find a single sentence in the sea of hundreds of sentences that you've decided to nitpick on, good for you, while THESE reffered to the fact that half the people in support of merger had a clear agenda simply because they had contributed exclusively to pages related to CNN, Trump, and all this discourse. You can, ofcourse, say that this is not a logical arguments, simply a version of ad hominem, and that I can agree on, but at the same time it's a fact and their agenda on this site should e questioned. Nigario.sss (talk) 10:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, you're sorry I'm lying? That's nice. It's hardly my fault if you can't parse your own writing. Bishonen &#124; talk 19:31, 9 July 2017 (UTC).