User talk:Sergecross73/Archive 75

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Beeblebrox
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Deskana

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Evad37

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
 * Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news
 * Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration
 * Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous
 * The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Messiah (American TV series)
Hi Sergecross, is there any chance you can have a look at the Messiah (American TV series) page? There have been a ton of edits to the page recently regarding (spoilers) the main character potentially being the Islamic version of the anti-christ. At the moment it has all been speculation but that hasn't stopped unregistered accounts with almost no previous edits from making unsupported edits several times an hour. I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to semi-protect the page for now? Thanks Nial Ist (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I’ve protected it. Just so you know, while you’re in the right here, it is possible for them to add their information too, if anyone bothers to do it right. You’re right that speculative, unsourced content should not be added as fact. But if they found reliable sources that mentioned the theory, and added it with the context somewhere that its not confirmed fact, then that could be allowed. Basically, the concern here is less about spoilers (they are allowed per WP:SPOILER), and more about WP:V, WP:RS, WP:OR, and generally sloppy editing practices. Sergecross73   msg me  15:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi again, thanks for the fast response. The show has already caused some religious outrage so I'm fairly certain that it would have continued for weeks. Just to clarify, the spoiler warning was for you as a courtesy in case you were planing on watching it, and the reception section of the page contains the speculative information which I left in as it did seam relevant in that context, my issue was simply the constant edits to character names and the Premise with unconfirmed information. Again, thanks for the help. Nial Ist (talk) 09:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, thanks for clarifying, and for looking out. I was just trying to do the same for you - many editors who are newer to the website don't realize that Wikipedia allows for spoilers, just since a lot of the internet tries to tiptoe around them. Its just one of those things that aren't readily apparent. Sergecross73   msg me  13:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Video
Go to 0:25 in this video. I think you'll be amused. JOE BRO  64  20:44, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Lol. Accurate. Sergecross73   msg me  22:46, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Ninth generation of video game consoles
Can you please unlock Ninth generation of video game consoles the article History of video game consoles (ninth generation) there needs to be moved to Ninth generation of video game consoles it is ready as a start status article. Valoem talk contrib 06:40, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I honestly don’t believe it’s ready for mainspace. I tried locking every combination of wording to keep people from making it so early. It looks like I missed a combination. Anyways, I’d recommend getting a WP:CONSENSUS at WT:VG. Sergecross73   msg me  12:08, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

A Radar Scope kitten for you!
Hey there Serge. I have worked quite a bit on the Radar Scope article this year, as another one of those that spilled over from my main deep research and writing at the very brilliant Nintendo of America and History of the Nintendo Entertainment System and whatnot. Then Namcokid chimed in a lot and wanted to take it to Good, as we discussed here. I learned a bit in the process, and squeezed out a real key fulcrum of Nintendo's path from Radar Scope to Donkey Kong and thus Mario saving the world. I wanted to carefully emphasize the legacy fact that out of Radar Scope's corpsified husk leapt Jumpman. A very cynical Yamauchi was forced to dig deep and scrape the bottom of the burning oil barrel for fresh talent at NCL. So I thought you might like it.

— Smuckola(talk) 02:22, 13 December 2019 (UTC) 
 * I do enjoy your deep dives, I’ll definitely read this later. Sergecross73   msg me  22:46, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Whoa, great work Smuckola! I remember thinking very recently how this article looked so scant, but now it's quite the opposite. The hard work is noticed! :) -Bchill53 (talk) 07:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

"Rock" genre
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Who_Do_You_Trust%3F_(album)&diff=931634899&oldid=931600571 SirZPthundergod9001 (talk) 07:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I sorta agree with BIL.  danny music editor  oops 07:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * What? Since when is rock “too general”? What does that even mean? There’s no requirement to use more specific genre than that. If we’ve got something more specific, like a source saying “hard rock”, then sure, I could see that reasoning. But there’s no way it’s not better than leaving the field blank. We’ve had discussions at Wikiprojects about about this in the past. This is acceptable sourcing and practice. Sergecross73   msg me  11:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If it were a review, that's one thing, but it's a list that only presents the genre in the source's title. I don't feel comfortable taking it from that site on that basis.  danny music editor  oops 04:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * That all sounds very arbitrary though. There’s no requirement genre come from reviews. We need a reliable source to call it a genre. And there’s no realistically possible conceptual alternative interpretation of this scenario: If an album gets listed on a list of best rock albums, the publication considers it a rock album. Sergecross73   msg me  04:19, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

 * Thanks, same to you! Sergecross73   msg me  23:54, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

happy holidays!


MrLinkinPark333 (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * Thank you! I hope you had a good day too! Sergecross73   msg me  01:18, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Received, responded. Sergecross73   msg me  00:37, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Corrective notice
You just commented on my talk page affirming "the above is exactly correct" at a message advocating the abusive enforcement of wrong policies and mass-removal of information. What gives? Googinber1234 (talk) 22:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ...It was a very basic affirmation of WP:V... Sergecross73   msg me  22:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Dreamy Jazz • Newslinger • Rosguill
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Deor • Spartaz • Xeno
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Angusmclellan • clpo13 • Edgar181 • Matthewedwards • NCurse

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Bradv • Casliber • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Bradv • Casliber • DGG • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Someguy1221

Guideline and policy news
 * A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
 * A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
 * Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.

Arbitration
 * The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
 * Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , , , , ,.

Miscellaneous
 * This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

New year, new me, and a goodbye for now.
Serge, you've been one of the kindest and best collaborators with me this entire time I've been on Wikipedia. An admin who loves hard rock music, would come to my defense when necessary, and always strove to keep the place clean and expand the encyclopedia on some of the best music and video games ever. I wanted to say thank you for working with me.

With all my GANs and GA reviews now completed, however, I've decided I need to step away from Wikipedia, with all the reasons listed there. This time it'll be for actual good (at least for a long time, and I may not ever return as a regular but we'll see), I attempted that once. I've felt that I've been a bit more of an annoyance to other editors, and sooner or later, I'm probably going to wear out my welcome if I continue anyway, as I'm meeting more and more who I come into regular conflict with. You were one of a special few who I thoroughly enjoyed working with, though.

Thanks, Serge. Happy editing, new year, and new decade, and good luck with everything.  danny music editor  oops 16:22, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know,, and thanks for the kind words. I've always enjoyed working with you as well. Youve been great to work with, on many projects, both content creation and disputes. I'm sorry to see you go, and I hope you'll come back some day, but I totally get it. You've got to take care of yourself first. Personally, I'll still be around plenty, but I think it'll be harder for me to make time to do much content creation for a while, just with being busier off-wiki myself.
 * Best of luck with your life. If you ever do come back, let me know, and come to me if you need any help. I'm sure I'll still be around. Take care. Sergecross73   msg me  17:04, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Casablanca / inclusion criteria
Hi Serge, re: the undo of Casablanca/ Miskatonic Graffiti - I understand reason, that's fine. But how does one know (in general) what exclusion criteria are? I know re: having to have external references - and that 'jumps' out in any page. You say only albums with pages can go here and now you say it - that jumps out too - but only (to me) after the event. Is there a link I should click (re: a change to any page with exclusion criteria) to check a given pages inclusion rules? If not - is it worth putting it on the actual page (I've gone off the page now - but "List of Concept Albums" in this case? I've done a few adds and edits over years and the whole Wikipedia system is very good - but not all that... intuitive. In fact, I may well find I'm doing this 'Talk' wrong! So all learning...

Thanks, Gordon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordon Panther (talk • contribs) 14:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi there. The inclusion criteria are listed on the article talk page, which can be found here. If there is inclusion criteria, they’re usually found on the talk page. As a general rule of thumb, that article’s criteria - requiring a source and the item on the list to have its own article - are pretty common criteria among Wikipedia lists that are actively maintained. Sergecross73   msg me  14:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Ergo Sum • Nick Moyes • QEDK • Wugapodes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Dennis Brown
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Aude • BrownHairedGirl • CALR • Jengod • John Reaves • J.smith • Kim Dent-Brown • K1Bond007 • MECU • Refdoc • RHaworth



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Partial blocks.
 * The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news
 * Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating.  There is currently one template: uw-pblock.
 * When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title.

Arbitration
 * Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous
 * Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
 * The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, edit on FF7 Remake page
Hi, I just put a single edit into this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_VII_Remake

You undid it. Are you unfamiliar with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:B911:E6F3:3111:AA0 (talk) 02:32, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you mean this edit? Sergecross73   msg me  02:40, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm unfamiliar with any of this, such as how to cite a source at the bottom of a major page. I should have looked more into it. Any search for Square Enix ethics department shows that they instruct the character designers, with FF7 Remake being what brought it to the spotlight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:B911:E6F3:3111:AA0 (talk) 02:48, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Please spare me, I’m aware of the situation, and we both know that’s not appropriate. Sergecross73   msg me  02:56, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It's far more accurate and not a twisting of words, and I don't know what you're saying is inappropriate. The character design is controlled by an ethics department. That line it was replacing makes it sound as if the balance of "stylized" and "realism" had anything to do with anything other than standards set by their ethics department, as was clarified in an interview. The only things along the lines of "realism", were things related to the ethics department. It had nothing to do with designer choices. The article shouldn't make it sound like anything otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:B911:E6F3:3111:AA0 (talk) 03:12, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You did a terrible job at framing it. If you wanted to add sourced content better articulating how an ethics department gave input on certain aspects, like the tweaking Tifa’s proportions/physics of her redesign, that could be reasoned. But your edit feels purposefully obtuse, as if we’re indicating that the only factor in all of the character designs was solely based off the direction of the ethics group. I find it hard to believe that you in good faith did such a terrible job at capturing the situation. It sounds more like the writings of a fan who was trying to grumble about change on the Internet. Sergecross73   msg me  03:41, 8 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I only changed that one line, so if you're referring to any other edits, those were not me. The reason it wasn't well written out is because I was replacing something not well written out with a more accurate line. The entire point was that the original line made sound like the current design direction was what the designers wanted, when it was not. If the article is going to talk about design at all it's pretty important to note that it's all under restrictions of a department most video game companies don't have. Most people don't even know any video game company has such a department. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:B911:E6F3:3111:AA0 (talk) 04:27, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I’m strictly talking about your edit. And I’m saying you’re taking too many liberties with what little is known in this situation. You don’t have enough information to talk about how much this ethics department is restricting things. All that is known is that it exists, and they implemented one particular change on Tifa. Any other details aren’t actually known. Thus, you can’t make as much of a sweeping generalization as you’ve attempted to make. Sergecross73   msg me  04:44, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It's been stated as being a department to ensure things will fall under age rating categories, such as the T/Teen rating under the ESRB they're going for. The entire game, not only character design, falls under the discretion of the ethics board. Why should it be not mentioned just because only 1 character is confirmed to be censored when it's known everything is under their discretion. I don't know how much clearer I can be that stating they went for a mix of realism and stylization implying it's what they wanted and that's why the result is what it is, is misleading. Stating that the entire game, particularly design, is under restrictions of an ethics department responsible for ensuring ratings, is 100% accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:B911:E6F3:3111:AA0 (talk) 05:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Name one specific thing they’ve influenced outside of the minor tweaking of Tifas redesign. Sergecross73   msg me  13:11, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Why should any specific be necessary in order to say the entire game is under the control of an ethics department? It doesn't matter if they never give any info about any game ever again, they've already stated the department controls them. They're obviously going to avoid stating any more specifics if they can help it after the backlash they got for revealing the department exists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:4108:32AF:EBF4:DFA9 (talk) 18:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It’s fine, I knew you wouldn’t answer my question, because as you are probably aware, no further details are publicly known. Which is my point - you can’t word it as if this department is were the sole factor controlling the character designs when we know so little about their actual influence. I also doubt they are about any “backlash”. Vocal minorities frequently whine about game development, only for games to achieve record sales upon release. (See Fire Emblem Fates, Pokemon Sword, etc.) Sergecross73   msg me  18:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I did answer your question, they released little detail beyond it but clearly stated the department has control over the entire game. You didn't answer mine, why do you keep going back to saying you can't make it sound like X or Y when I clearly don't. It is what it is, the entire game is under the department. And record sales don't prove anything, they could lose 90% of sales and still have record sales. And considering how far people like you go to avoid any talk about anything like this, it's pretty obvious there is a lot of backlash. Any mention of it is shut down and banned on any forum or subreddit, I've seen enough people banned to know it's not a "small minority" but the overwhelming majority of actual fans. Do you think any normal human being is okay with a video game company having an "ethics department" that has little to do with the name and everything to do with censorship? You were hostile from the start in a way you wouldn't dare in real life, that told me all I needed to know off the bat.


 * All that is irrelevant, you keep dodging the fact that the department is in control of the game, who said anything about "sole" control. You keep twisting every single thing I say and adding your own idea into it to make it "technically you can't say it like that". Write that the department exists, and that they have control, and what they've confirmed changed so far. Don't want to? Yeah I know, you have your own agenda it seems. I bet it was removed when someone added to Square Enix's main page. I'm not going to find any mention of a censorship department there am I? Why are you so fanatically obsessed with making sure no one finds out?
 * Thanks, I knew I could eventually get you to show your true colors and intentions. Wikipedia is not your WP:SOAPBOX about censorship. And again, I have no opposition in including something about it, just not in your ham-fisted, sloppy, contextless wording. Feel free to peruse the page’s edit history. I don’t recall any prior attempts of anyone trying to add or reject content on this point. No “agenda” or “concentrated effort” in the past. Just you doing a really bad job of illustrating a point. You worded it terrible. You didn’t add a source. And you’re not supposed to add new ideas in the WP:LEAD. But sure, point the finger at me, the guy who volunteers his time cleaning up messes like this. Sergecross73   msg me  19:27, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You lead with "Please spare me", and goaded me from the start with nonsense twisting of words, ignoring everything I say by pretending it's something else that can't be written due to technicalities. Did you really think I didn't see the "aha gotcha" nonsense coming a mile away? You're not clever. Even a dog would have known what you were doing. No, you showed your true colours, immediately. Wikipedia is not your playground for trying to alter history. And you're not just a volunteer, you're someone clearly unhealthy obsession. You continue your nonsense pretending you're some great help to the community, meanwhile continuing to spew BS such as no source when we both know the sources are endless, every "gaming" site had the quotes from the interview, and you claim to know about it, and I made it clear from the start I have a source to add. So tell me again why it's not on this page if you're so familiar? Oh yes, you already stated BS such as it being a "minority" "whining", and showed that you're some SJW, making up any excuse to try to manipulate what people see. People like you are why wikipedia is branded as having an agenda, it's always the same when it comes to censorship, it's one of you, with your self-righteous smug pseudo-logic.


 * I could pick literally any site that reported on it, make a new section, and cite the sources. And you'll still look for an excuse to remove it. It has nothing to do with quality, stop pretending it does. This whole wiki page is sloppy. I could follow every rule and you'll still remove it. I have literally never once seen any controversy about anything censorship related on any video game page, no matter how huge such as this this one, and every time I take a look at the history, it's someone like you going out of their way to dismiss it with fake excuses. Usually with the same smug attitude.
 * To be clear, this singular revert is your evidence for you supposedly uncovering some grand social justice agenda? That? That...logic...aside, I do apologize for not being nicer. I took your edit as bad faith vandalism. I didn’t think someone could write that in good-faith, but appears that, you did. I assumed it was someone goofing around, like when kids add Sanic memes to Sonic articles. Sergecross73   msg me  20:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It has very little to do with just a single revert of so little, despite the importance of that bit, and everything to do with this conversation and your view on it. I'm not some guy out to promote some agenda, or to "soapbox". It's become impossible to believe in good faith that anything on Wikipedia doesn't have some sort of social justice bias when that's all I've seen for years. Am I supposed to believe that you have no bias in that direction, when you dismiss such obviously large backlash as a vocal minority whining while constantly skewing what I said into some other form? Are we seeing the same things out there? Aside from being reported everywhere with massive amounts of replies (and some sites deleted their entire page of it, as there was so much hate being spewed at SE), I'm seeing it being brought up constantly with a swift ban on whoever mentions it, anywhere. With any mention being shut down permanently, yet it still constantly coming up, it's pretty clear it's not a minority.


 * People have been furious at Sony for a while and eventually got them to reveal their new censorship policies, after Square revealed their censor department that goes beyond ESRB requirements, that didn't get any better. I find it borderline impossible to believe you haven't noticed these trends that have been going on for years. Assuming you really are replying in good faith, you should be able to see why you made yourself look like you're following that same pattern of social justice bias with the way the conversation went.


 * People aren't furious at any single act of censorship, though changing an iconic character pointlessly didn't help, it's the relentless pointless changes as a whole and prodding the core fan bases that has them riled up. In the case of FF7/Tifa it's nothing to do with some perverts wanting large breasts, any monkey can open up a browser and do a search, it's the constant loss of control and change without true purpose. Anyone who wanted to buy the FF7 Remake was going to buy it regardless, not one was going to complain demanding censorship. And with the censorship being so flagrant, SE didn't need to state a single thing for fans to know. You were questioning if anything else is affected by the censor department, you'll see when the game is released even without SE saying another word. Let me refresh your memory, in the classic there's uses of words such as "retard", innuendos throughout, and the characters weren't politically correct and included a foul-mouthed chain-smoking wife-abuser. Do you think all that will get through?


 * Just one final thing I want to say: Even in the scenario where something like this happens and it's actually just a minority whining, something such as a censor department is still significant. That on it's own is worth mentioning. I've wasted enough of both our time, you can go ahead and delete this section if you want, there's no need to litter your page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:4108:32AF:EBF4:DFA9 (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem is that you’re mistakenly conflating issues - me undoing your edit, and my indifference for fans whining on the Internet. They are not connected. I did not revert your edit because I don’t care about fans complaining. I reverted it because it was poorly worded and lacked context. As I’ve stated multiple times, if you’d bother to tighten it up, it could be a valid addition. I only mentioned fans whining on the Internet being inconsequential because I felt your argument of “Square wont comment more because of the fan backlash” to be ridiculous. So either calm down and fix your sloppy writing, or take your angry tirades about fictional character booby size somewhere else. I don’t get upset about silly things like that. Life’s too short to care about crap like that. Sergecross73   msg me
 * There you go again, "your angry tirades about fictional character booby size", after I gave a clear explanation of why people are upset, you turn around say the exact opposite, in the worst possible manner straight to me as if I'm going to get upset about that or don't understand what you're doing. It doesn't work. And you pretending you're indifferent is hilarious at this point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:4108:32AF:EBF4:DFA9 (talk) 00:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn’t matter, because all your gamer rage stuff has nothing to do with me, or the edit of yours that I’ve undone. Tell it to someone else. I don’t care. I just need you to not make bad edits on Wikipedia. Sergecross73   msg me  01:01, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The only one raging is you, throwing out insults like your "your angry tirades about fictional character booby size" and "gamer rage" nonsense in hopes of getting a rise. No one is angry, except maybe you. To say you're biased or have an agenda is an understatement, and you're terrible at hiding your weak attempts to twist words to fit your agenda. Get a new hobby instead of trying to bury things you don't like in an encyclopedia. You're pretty much the poster child of the SJW weasel-word using wiki editor who throws out strawmen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C80:646:4108:32AF:EBF4:DFA9 (talk) 01:16, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, the issue is about your bad writing. And that doesn’t make me angry. It happens all the time. You’re taking it worse than most, but this is still pretty every day stuff... Sergecross73   msg me  01:29, 9 February 2020 (UTC)


 * No, again, this is about bad, contextless writing. Sergecross73   msg me  14:40, 9 February 2020 (UTC)