390:. The other person changed their name 3 times by the way. The only other person to say something on the original debate was the user the thread was originally about, and they were on my side. But this is a different debate entirely, I am just trying to reach a consensus to improve the article because it was pointed out to me by a guy from Dispute Resolution that the whole thing was arbitrary so, my idea was to make the page less arbitrary. So I thought maybe it could be edited so that it reflects the series instead. I made the edit, Yuugone/Ajeeb Praani/Someonewhoisusingtheinternet reverted. I made the change they wanted. He reverted again, we went to talk. Came up with changes. I made the changes. He reverted again. A week later, we went to talk. I made changes, he reverted. I finally made a revert asking him to come up with changes.
92:
485:". I did find multiple sources that claimed she was a protagonist right off the bat. And since I was looking for both terms, I found absolutely 0 sources that said she was a supporting character. The problem was Yuugone/Ajeeb Praani/Someonewhoisusingtheinternet was ignoring the sources I have found. They also had sources but none of their sources backed their claim, only relying on original research claims. I just felt like clearing that up.
33:
532:
65:
163:
429:
Let go and let the page be arbitrary or wrong? I did let go by the way, the debate is not about characters being protagonists anymore. It is about making the page look better and less arbitrary and wrong. That is all I wanted. I have been trying to collaborate. Maybe you should tell that to
444:"I've learned to let go and I'm still getting blocked" is...not the great comeback you'd like it to be. And yes, the other editor has two blocks for edit warring themselves. But that's not a defense against your block. All it means is that you're
408:
blocks for edit warring. If you don't change your ways, the fourth one will almost certainly be indefinite in length. You're probably lucky this one wasn't. You need to learn how to let go if you're going to work on a
318:
sufficiently dispositive (and I mean that in more than one sense, obviously) of this request, they are invited to take Master's request up and look through their contribs history. Or just
69:
319:
304:
template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.
404:
Almost your entire time here has been spent on excessive arguing over trivial details that don't matter much. And what do you have to show for it?
540:
347:
quite clearly says, edit warring can be blockable even in situations where 3RR is not violated, and having been previously blocked twice for ...
481:
I would also like to clear up something Daniel Case said, he said "if you were right, you would have found a reliable source proving your point
203:
289:
139:
343:
To this they have now added the usual spurious logic (implied, it would seem) that as long as they didn't violate 3RR they were OK. But, as
386:
I tried for all this time to reach some kind of consensus with
Yuugone/Ajeeb Praani/Someonewhoisusingtheinternet. Also 1 against 1 is not
81:
120:
198:
128:
132:
49:
45:
176:
100:
536:
170:
506:
77:
175:
Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
113:
109:
73:
543:, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the
217:
458:
419:
376:
124:
356:
151:
68:
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
370:
after I tried I gave up trying to mediate it. Horrible waste of everyone's time, Master106 included.
511:
I told you not to revert it to the arbitrary system and to sort it in a way you'd be happy about.
556:
544:
453:
414:
371:
449:
333:
352:
298:
275:
147:
32:
387:
351:(neither block summary mentions 3RR), Master cannot seriously claim to be unaware of this.
337:
91:
344:
329:
138:
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review
Knowledge (XXG)'s
366:
Block endorsed. It's absolutely insane to me that they've continued this dispute on for
585:
567:
548:
512:
486:
431:
391:
249:
181:
581:
552:
531:
271:
17:
547:. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been
584:
Sorry, misread the template. I thought you were claiming it was dubious.
593:
575:
560:
520:
494:
463:
439:
424:
399:
381:
360:
279:
270:
I did. You edit warred. Your conduct in general is concerning as well.
257:
155:
85:
324:
Master makes of themselves not just a poster child, but an entire
430:
Yuugone/Ajeeb Praani/Someonewhoisusingtheinternet too honestly.
142:, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:
72:
regarding a possible violation of
Knowledge (XXG)'s policy on
26:
161:
90:
127:. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek
314:
Comment from blocking admin: If a reviewer does not find
286:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please
306:
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
70:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring
315:
231:
227:
221:
212:
208:
194:
190:
186:
448:
headed for indefinite blocks if you don't change your
131:, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
328:, of the characteristics of hardened edit warriors:
169:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
112:. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to
248:Wait what? I did not edit war. Check the logs.
539:from pages on Knowledge (XXG), as you did to
322:regarding the instant issue behind the block.
59:Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
8:
119:During a dispute, you should first try to
566:Sources say he was injured by a bullet.
316:my lengthy comments at ANEW on this user
144:{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
541:Attempted assassination of Donald Trump
7:
320:this particular talk page discussion
332:, hairsplitting "logic", and total
25:
530:
63:
31:
413:project like Knowledge (XXG).
1:
495:21:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
121:discuss controversial changes
104:from editing for a period of
521:16:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
464:21:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
440:20:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
425:20:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
400:20:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
382:20:23, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
361:20:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
280:20:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
258:19:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
156:19:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
86:06:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
173:, who declined the request.
610:
338:they are a minority of one
334:obliviousness to consensus
594:02:15, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
576:02:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
561:02:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
507:Someonewhoisusinginternet
290:guide to appealing blocks
140:guide to appealing blocks
114:make useful contributions
78:Someonewhoisusinginternet
29:
589:
571:
516:
490:
435:
395:
253:
500:Why Did You Revert It?
166:
95:
537:maintenance templates
535:Please do not remove
218:change block settings
165:
94:
326:gallery exhibition
167:
129:dispute resolution
96:
368:another half year
56:
55:
16:(Redirected from
601:
534:
510:
461:
456:
422:
417:
379:
374:
303:
297:
237:
235:
224:
206:
204:deleted contribs
164:
145:
76:. Thank you.
67:
66:
35:
27:
21:
609:
608:
604:
603:
602:
600:
599:
598:
551:. Thank you. –
528:
504:
502:
459:
454:
420:
415:
377:
372:
330:tendentiousness
309:
301:
295:
294:, then use the
283:
261:
225:
215:
201:
184:
177:blocking policy
162:
159:
158:
143:
136:
133:page protection
117:
64:
61:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
607:
605:
597:
596:
578:
527:
524:
501:
498:
479:
478:
477:
476:
475:
474:
473:
472:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
284:
268:
264:Decline reason
246:
242:Request reason
239:
160:
137:
118:
98:You have been
97:
89:
60:
57:
54:
53:
41:
40:
37:
24:
18:User:Master106
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
606:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
577:
573:
569:
565:
564:
563:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
542:
538:
533:
525:
523:
522:
518:
514:
508:
499:
497:
496:
492:
488:
484:
465:
462:
457:
451:
447:
443:
442:
441:
437:
433:
428:
427:
426:
423:
418:
412:
411:collaborative
407:
403:
402:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
384:
383:
380:
375:
369:
365:
364:
363:
362:
358:
354:
350:
346:
341:
339:
335:
331:
327:
321:
317:
313:
312:
311:
310:
308:
307:
300:
293:
291:
282:
281:
277:
273:
267:
265:
260:
259:
255:
251:
245:
243:
238:
233:
229:
223:
219:
214:
210:
205:
200:
196:
195:global blocks
192:
191:active blocks
188:
183:
178:
174:
172:
171:administrator
157:
153:
149:
141:
134:
130:
126:
122:
115:
111:
107:
103:
102:
93:
88:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
58:
52:
51:
47:
43:
42:
38:
36:
34:
28:
19:
545:edit summary
529:
503:
482:
480:
455:Sergecross73
445:
416:Sergecross73
410:
405:
373:Sergecross73
367:
349:edit warring
348:
342:
325:
323:
305:
287:
285:
269:
263:
262:
247:
241:
240:
213:creation log
180:
168:
110:edit warring
105:
99:
74:edit warring
62:
44:
30:
353:Daniel Case
148:Daniel Case
452:approach.
209:filter log
39:Archives:
586:Master106
568:Master106
526:July 2024
513:Master106
487:Master106
432:Master106
392:Master106
288:read the
250:Master106
228:checkuser
187:block log
182:Master106
125:consensus
123:and seek
50:Archive 2
46:Archive 1
582:Muboshgu
553:Muboshgu
549:reverted
483:long ago
199:contribs
450:WP:IDHT
299:unblock
222:unblock
106:2 weeks
101:blocked
460:msg me
421:msg me
388:WP:1AM
378:msg me
336:where
272:331dot
406:Three
345:WP:EW
292:first
590:talk
572:talk
557:talk
517:talk
491:talk
446:both
436:talk
396:talk
357:talk
276:talk
254:talk
152:talk
108:for
82:talk
232:log
179:).
146:.
592:)
574:)
559:)
519:)
493:)
438:)
398:)
359:)
302:}}
296:{{
278:)
266::
256:)
244::
226:•
220:•
216:•
211:•
207:•
202:•
197:•
193:•
189:•
154:)
116:.
84:)
48:,
588:(
580:@
570:(
555:(
515:(
509::
505:@
489:(
434:(
394:(
355:(
340:.
274:(
252:(
236:)
234:)
230:(
185:(
150:(
135:.
80:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
