User talk:SlySneakyFox

May 2021
Your recent editing history at Otokonoko shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ryk72 talk 23:19, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Ryk72 talk 08:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello User:SlySneakyFox. It appears you continued to revert the article while the report was still active. Your revert was about 'trap', the exact word that was contested previously. There may still be time for you undo your last change to avoid a block. EdJohnston (talk) 03:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Who are you? Did the other user also receive an edit waring notice for they are doing the same thing? 03:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It has been undone, for now. SlySneakyFox (talk) 04:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for undoing your edit. I am one of the administrators who works on the 3RR board. If you had not undone your edit a block would be the next step. In the report, User:Bbb23 was considering an indefinite block of your account so I hope this will persuade you to pay more attention to our policies. EdJohnston (talk) 04:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * SlySneakyFox, I can't believe you reinstated your edit after the above conversation. You're fortunate I blocked you only for a week. The next block will be indefinite.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:35, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Unsourced content
Why are you so insistent that "otokonoko" and "trap" be linked? You have yet to produce a single reliable source linking the terms, and when challenged on this, you choose - instead of actually sourcing your claims - to instead disparage the sources of other points of information in an article. You understand that this isn't an argument in your favor, right? Rather, it's in favor of paring out the unreliably-sourced information? NekoKatsun (nyaa) 22:34, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, thank you for engaging with me in discussion on the Glossary of anime and manga‎ talkpage; I truly appreciate it. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 22:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Because they are linked. People have a bias against linking them in my opinion. This is from seeing people only go after that term and the sources only once they are attached to the term not before. At the very least it should be citation needed via WP:BLUE. My "disparage the sources of other points of information in an article" Is because the sources I provide are as reliable as those sources. I fully understand if they agree both sources will be removed and I am perfectly fine with that. Always happy to have a talk and include other opinions. It's far better then an edit war even if they disagree with me. SlySneakyFox (talk) 23:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at Otokonoko. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Bbb23 (talk) 00:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

The edit warring policy also says "it is perfectly possible to engage in an edit war without breaking the three-revert rule". You were blocked for edit warring not a 3RR violation. Looking back on the page history you have been edit warring for months now. You are not entitled to X number of reverts a day. This is a long term issue and it needs to stop. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 02:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If that's the case how come I wasn't banned when the other user filed the complaint? If I file a complaint on them will they also qualify under edit warring? I will accept my ban if it was for that. However it is very clear it was for the recent edit given by the comment "An extraordinary amount of chutzpah. Blocked one week" in my section of WP:AN/EW SlySneakyFox (talk) 03:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Your final edit to the page was to once again add the term "trap". It was clearly the same matter that was contested. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 04:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I see you agree now it was about the last edit. Same topic but not the same matter as the edit war. As that was about the same sources and same sentence. This edit was a completely different sources and different sentences but still about trap, yes. This was a new BRD cycle. It was not an addition to the revert edit war. SlySneakyFox (talk) 04:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay. A question then to help me determine how big the ball park is for "same matter". If I reverted the most recent edit of Otokonoko for "claim is not supported by source" and leave a comment in the talk page. Would that be seen as the RD in the BRD-cycle or would that be seen as more edit warring? SlySneakyFox (talk) 05:32, 6 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Any edit that undoes the edit of another user is a revert. The answer is in your question "If I reverted...". Keep in mind that BRD is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines.Our edit warring policy is. The BRD page even talks about edit warring. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 05:54, 6 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I will take that as a yes, it will be seen as a continuation of edit warring. If I make an edit (not revert) to which I believe is a refinement then go to the talk page to discuss complete removal then that should be okay? SlySneakyFox (talk) 07:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

From the edit warring policy: "A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors". This is the standard used. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 07:27, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If I may chime in? Discuss a thing on the talkpage and gain consensus BEFORE making changes to article space. It's really hard to edit war if you're not editing article space. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 14:57, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Right back at you. Reminder your most recent edit had no discussion in the talk page. SlySneakyFox (talk) 08:03, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's correct. And I've never been accused of edit-warring, let alone been blocked for it. I suggest you improve your own behaviour before trying to police others. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 16:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021
Because of your ongoing disruptive and tendentious editing, you have been blocked indefinitely from Otokonoko and Talk: Otokonoko. If you extend your disruption to other articles, you will be blocked from those articles as well, or blocked completely. Please read Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:44, 25 August 2021 (UTC)