User talk:Checkmate824

Hello, I'm KoshVorlon. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to NES Classic Edition have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. KoshVorlon} 20:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HEY D*******, don't ever talk on my page again. for anyone interested here's my "unconstructive" edits. What a f******* tool. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NES_Classic_Edition&oldid=760740228

January 2017[edit]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:NES Classic Edition‎. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Drop the personal attacks. I agree your edit was not disruptive and restored it, but personal attacks will not be tolerated. -- ferret (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's just I felt powerless, and felt like it was uncalled for and I had no defense. From my experience, those who are powerless, who do Not stand up for themselves by dismantling their abusers, will never be truly allowed to live.Sam (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

+++++++++++ @Ferret: I'll be less specific next time, lol. But I found this "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it."; the "ignore all rules" rule. I point this out, because, If, at any time, someone abuses power, even if, it's; an accident, power available to all, etc, I still feel it's important to bring up the topic. Maybe my points were off-base, and maybe targeting a specific person, a) ignores the fallibility in ALL human's nature, which is what I intend to address, and b) obviously could lead to even greater consequences. And I'll add, Yes, I admit, deleting.. Someone's talk page, Was Intentional vandalism, but I'd wager a guess it's what brought attention to my problem, and got it fixed, whereas, if I said nothing inflammatory at all, nor did anything, it would have stood unnoticed. So: point being, I stand by my actions, even tho I learned from the experience. I say all this only to make my position clear, and, hopefully, leads to an improved Wikipedia, on the community side.

For future reference, if this comes up again down the line, you're going to be really hard pressed to convince anyone that name calling was something that was helping you improve the Wikipedia. Don't over think it - just don't call other people names. It'd also probably be good to learn the rules before you go about accusing others of great injustices. Or if you have questions, just ask people nicely why they did something, since I believe this whole incident boiled down to a simple good faith accident by the other editor. Sergecross73 msg me 03:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, which is a more convenient excuse, that I would have been ignored, or "oopsy, I made a boo-boo."?. Yo, whatever, make your threats, but I already said I wouldn't name-call again, so why don't YOU @Sergecross73: get off my talk page, since this has already been resolved, you "name called" Sam (talk) 03:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC) "for future reference"; you're only proving my point that you are bunch of bullies, kicking a man when he's down, or whatever you think you are doing. Sam (talk) 03:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't appear to be resolved at all - as I said, your "justification" of using WP:IAR to justify personal attacks is ludicrous, and you didn't (don't) seem to understand that. I, like ferret, am trying to help you out here, because you're not handling yourself well so far. If you're just going to sass every person who makes an edit you don't like, you're probably going to find yourself blocked pretty quickly. Nobody's bullying you. We're just telling you the rules of the website. Sergecross73 msg me 04:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to get that threatening me with being Blocked, AGAIN, even tho, AS YOU SAY, Ferret already did so, is not a... "Constructive" edit, so why don't you Back Off. Sam (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC) Oh, and... uh... you disagree with my position on paring down the Switch article, and you come to my page and insert yourself into a previous discussion, and you don't see why that might be perceived as A) self-aggrandizing B) arrogant C) bullying and D) petty? come on, guy, get with the program of Human decency, cuz, I'm starting to think getting banned from this website might be worth continuing to stand up for rights to free speech and equality. So just... back off, Random Guy. Sam (talk) 04:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC) (and whether or not everyone else on earth knows who you are, to me, you're just some random guy, who've I've NEVER talked to, so check your superiority-complexed tone.[reply]

There is nothing "unconstructive" about an admin (me) telling a new user (you) that their understanding of policy is incorrect. Please stop taking every comment to an emotional and personal extreme. At this rate, you're going to get yourself so bogged down in petty arguments that you're not going to do any constructive. I'll stop lecturing you on policy if you stop making incorrect comments on policy. (Like your thing on "right to free speech" - please read WP:FREESPEECH.) Sergecross73 msg me 04:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"There is nothing "unconstructive" about an admin (me) telling a new user (you) that their understanding of policy is incorrect." uuuuuh except, SOMEONE IN THE EXACT POSITION ALREADY DID THAT. And you just looooooooooove to bring your position into the argument, and go figure, THATS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM IM STILL ARGUING. You really really want to "stop lecturing me" now, yet you started it, after it already stopped. Listen, GUY, administrator or not, whether I stopped or not, I apparently AM still "bogged down in petty arguments", arguements that have already ended peacefully, and you're ONLY justification, is that you're an administrator, and you don't get what the problem is.... Really? I mean, really? Sam (talk) 04:33, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-read my original comment. I came here to tell you that your application of our "ignore all rules" concept was incorrect. No one had told you that yet. That was the point. Sergecross73 msg me 04:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ok, fine, maybe this > "I point this out, because, If, at any time, someone abuses power, even if, it's; an accident, power available to all, etc, I still feel it's important to bring up the topic." wasn't clear, let me expound on that. "I Point this out, ONLY because". Was that helpful? Will you go away now? Sam (talk) 04:42, 19 January 2017 (UTC) Are We done here, or not? because, contrary to popular belief, I don't actually enjoy arguing on the internet, altho when physically present in front of others, the physical effects of empathy allow a more reasoned and mutually respected discourse, limiting radicalized opinions, and thus, argumentation is a much more enjoyable experience. Sam (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'd like to assert that something can be justified without being excused. I Did apologize and I meant it, but I simply wanted to point out that if it wasn't for my own way of expressing myself, as in: if I was the same as the hundreds of others daily who are deleted and just walk away: then this "accident" wouldn't have been fixed. It's a matter of not regretting a mistake, if it draws attention to a serious issue, Or, in some way, leads to a satisfying conclusion, despite being, as I said, a mistake.Sam (talk) 04:26, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AND BY THE WAY; he "accidentally" did it, and then came and talked on my talk page twice, supporting his revert, so why don't you just back off, ok? Sam (talk) 03:56, 19 January 2017 (UTC) just saying... you shouldn't put more effort into defending your accidents, than you do in not making them. I know, in modern society, people believe "put number 1 first" but I make sure not to negatively impact others, before I worry about minimizing others' effects on me. Sam (talk) 04:22, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Checkmate824, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! -- ferret (talk) 22:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to leave you the standard welcome template so you'd have links to the core Wikipedia principals. Just remember to keep a cool head, mistakes can happen and remember Wikipedia can be slow moving at times, it's not real time. Sometimes someone may not see their mistake or a message for a while. Give them time! :) -- ferret (talk) 22:09, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TEST test 2