User talk:Selvydra

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Selvydra! Thank you for your contributions. I am HopsonRoad and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! HopsonRoad (talk) 00:04, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Minor edits
Hi Selvydra, I just wanted to let you know that in the future you should only click the minor edit button if the edits you're making are actually minor (e.g. fixing a typo or formatting), and shouldn't be used for larger changes (especially considering the controversial nature of the article's topic). This isn't really a big thing but I just wanted to remind you. Thank you for helping improve the article! Cheers. — Chevvin 01:37, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello – fair enough. I figured if it's something that doesn't meaningfully change the content (additional context to 1 sentence + grammar fixes), it would qualify as minor. But, it may have changed the tone somewhat. I'll err on the side of not using it in the future. Selvydra (talk) 05:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:39, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Talking to MikkelJSmith2
Are you going to communicate to MikkelJSmith2 that the days-old content that this user edit-warred back into the article should be removed ASAP? Because that editor refuses to accept that WP:BRD is a thing and is under the wrong impression that multiple editors share his view of Wikipedia policy. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:56, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You really seem to have a problem with me. As mentioned in other discussions, I didn't edit war, I restored Selvydra's edit, which as I stated on VP may have been a misunderstanding of policy on my part due to the conflicting information that was shared with me and due to my interpretation. Furthermore, I didn't refuse to accept WP:BRD, I've always accepted it, I was asking questions on VP to see if I made a mistake in interpretation. I've been trying my best and for you keep trying singling me out and making up claims that are not true. I've addressed complaints on the page, but I'm sorry if I went about it the wrong way, like I stated on other pages that wasn't my intention. MikkelJSmith (talk) 17:18, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Why then won't you revert your mass restoration of disputed content? Even content that was added days ago? No edit or fixes can be made to the enormous amounts of content that you decided on your own to mass restore in violation of BRD because no one wants to violate Wikipedia policy and be seen as edit-warring. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:24, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , sure, I'll do it later, you should have asked earlier. If you did, sorry that I missed it. I'll have to do it later though, since I'm busy with real life stuff atm. MikkelJSmith (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Although, what do I do about the edits that came after though? MikkelJSmith (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * tagging as well since their answer would help too. MikkelJSmith (talk) 19:18, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If I have your permission to undo your big edit and fix the subsequent edits, I can do it. That said, there's no time pressure. They key was just getting everyone on the same page regarding how consensus works. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 19:58, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , go ahead. I agreed with like 90% of your edits. I just got policy wrong, once again, I'm so sorry about that. Are we fine? I also think some of the subsequent edits by other editors and I were solving some issues, but we can work on those later. There's no rush like you said. MikkelJSmith (talk) 20:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, we are fine. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 20:20, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Whoa, okay; hi and welcome to round 2 of WP:DR. I forgot to give my cat his supper yesterday because of round 1; suffice to say he wasn't happy. (Don't worry – he got it eventually.)
 * – It seems like the situation is clearing up. I just wanted to make a few notes.
 * In case it isn't clear, my edit (which was restored to) was to update the pre-deletion content with undisputed stuff. I then reverted it again, because I too didn't want to be seen as edit-warring. I did this to take those the citations, MOS etc. out of the equation in the hopes that this would allow us to hone in on the parts that were disputed, whether or not the edit war continued. I didn't mean to encourage it with that action, if that's what I was being alleged of doing.
 * No edit or fixes can be made to the enormous amounts of content You probably already know this, but absent the ability to edit fixes into the live article, you could have pulled the inactive version into your userspace and drafted the changes there. Another option is to do what I did – revert, edit and then undo that.
 * How do you want to go about the consensus process? It looked like MrX's edits at least partially overlapped with yours. Should we start by resolving those and then move on to the content you deleted before him? Selvydra (talk) 20:13, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Each piece of information that you or others want included should be discussed on the talk page and/or external boards to achieve consensus. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 20:20, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * – Alright. Just for your information, there was such a process ongoing already re: MrX's removals, so expect to see some of those returned if/when consensus has been achieved. New discussions will be started for disputed removals not addressed by him. Selvydra (talk) 20:40, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I was pinged, but it looks like the issue at hand has resolved itself? - MrX 🖋 23:11, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I think so. Consensus-building should be next, following Snoogans' removals and edits. Selvydra (talk) 23:18, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

On media matters
I'm sorry but I agree with snoog & the x that the entry on Media coverage of Bernie Sanders is much too long, but also think the entry has potential. Streamlining so as not to drown the reader would be the best thing to do. You saw the reaction at the Village Pump, etc. Would you consider going back and undoing any part of your mass restoration, MikkelJSmith? Can we work on paring this page down to what is really strongly sourced and historical? I think there is likely to be a there there, worth an entry, the more I look back into it. 🌿  SashiRolls t ·  c 19:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , don't worry. I agreed with them. I just wasn't sure what to make of the subsequent edits. MikkelJSmith (talk) 20:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes unfortunately it won't be a quick and simple button-press, but a thing to do over time, maybe bit by bit, and perhaps with less radical solutions then those two propose. I'll try to help when I have some time, but I don't really have that much at the moment. Still, I can pitch in. 🌿   SashiRolls t ·  c 20:07, 29 December 2019 (UTC)