User talk:MainEditoreditoreditor
August 2021[edit]
Hello, I'm FMSky. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Lena Dunham, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 14:56, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
The sources are already cited MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 14:57, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I’m not a beginner. The sources are already cited on the page. I’m republishing as is. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 14:58, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
You appear to have created an account specifically to add controversial material to a biography. Your edits consist of violations of BLP policy. Restore them and your account will be blocked from editing. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 16:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I am going to restore them. As a victim of childhood sexual abuse, I will NOT stand by and let this (Redacted) I am a long-standing donor to Wikipedia and I do NOT make edits lightly. I had another account, but have lost access to that email address, so I set another one up today and not just for this, but because I want a say in the board elections. You are being controversial. I have screenshot this screen as I know you are going to remove this account based on your own opinion of the actions of someone you have no idea about, no knowledge of and no right to pass judgment on. Please let me know how to report this conversation to a higher, more qualified representative of Wikipedia. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Other administrators, more experienced than me, who have previously had administrative oversight of this particular article include User:Gamaliel, User:C.Fred, User:Muboshgu, User:Floquenbeam, and User:Bishonen. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 17:42, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Don’t care. Please let me know how to report you for this extremely insulting characterization of my edit, of childhood sex abuse being brought to the attention to the reader that you somehow simply do not want published. There is no opinion in the edit. Those are facts. Want to make (Redacted) look better? If so, you have bigger problems than wiki edits. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 17:46, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not interested in, nor intending to, pass any judgment. My interest is only in making sure BLP policy is adhered to. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 17:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Your description of Lena Dunham is unsourced and defamatory, and should you persist in inserting unsourced, defamatory claims about a living person, you will surely be blocked from editing the encyclopedia. No one is afraid of your empty threats. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:00, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
It is, so back off! Please let me know how to report you for this egregious violation of my right to edit, correctly and with both citation and references. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:00, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- You have no
right to edit
. Good luck and enjoy the block, which will probably be a permanent WP:NOTHERE block at this point. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:01, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Good. I don’t want you afraid. I want you to wake up and give me the link to report the admins of this article. She is an admitted childhood sexual predator and that is cited in the material. What more do you want? She admits to the crime she was never charged with. I will need the link to report you and Paul Erik. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Watch what happens now! MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Wow. Look at that. Not blocked and still editing, correctly, might I add. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:10, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Lena Dunham 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—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—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Just to let you know, Inhave reported you for violations of Wikipedia’s rules of conduct and I plan to take this as far up the line of Wikipedia leadership that I can do that you are never able to say such egregious, hateful things to someone you don’t know and have no idea of their background. As per Wikipedia’s policy, I am simply letting you know this. Do NOT respond to me here any longer. We will continue this on the editors board and up through the chain of custody for Wikipedia. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:46, 25 August 2021 (UTC) ?
MainEditoreditoreditor, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Hi MainEditoreditoreditor! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC) |
Discretionary sanctions notice[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I want to know how to report you. I’ve asked a bunch, but I will simply start calling Wikipedia if you don’t provide me with a viable way to report you and argue my point that there was nothing defamatory in the edit. The person with which the page is in reference to (Lena Dunham) is simply quoted, as being (Redacted). I will need the link to report you. You know you have to provide me the ability to report you or do you think yourself as the Wikipedia police far above reproach or oversight? MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- The Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents is thataway. You can have all the rope you'd like to hang yourself with. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Really? “The rope you’d like to hang yourself with”? That got my attention, see, you just said that to a survivor of an attempted suicide due to child sexual abuse. You are a bad person and I look forward to posting your statement as a representation of just how belligerent and callous you and the other admin has been. MainEditoreditoreditor (talk) 18:25, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- Uninvolved editor here: this is not going to go your way. Your edits here inject very inflammatory language that isn't reflected in the given references. Nothing in that USA Today article supports anything close to your wording that she profits from sexual abuse. You made that claim and it violates WP:BLP by being unreferenced original research. As for the rope comment, NorthBySouthBaranof linked to WP:ROPE which is an essay and in no way a threat. If you continue to make transparently false accusations of harassment by other editors here to you will destroy any chance you have at finding anyone willing to unblock you when the inevitable block happens. Notfrompedro (talk) 18:56, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- Ah - I promised at ANI to notify you about the above-described discretionary sanctions; I now realised that you have already been notified, so I shall not repeat the message. Best Girth Summit (blether) 19:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
August 2021[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 19:10, 25 August 2021 (UTC)- Hi - just to unpack the above somewhat - in your unblock request, you made blatant personal attacks towards other editors, making outrageous and hurtful accusations about their motives, when all they were seeking to do was enforce our policies on how we cover biographies of living people. I am sorry that you were offended by the words used by another editor; nevertheless, I do not believe that it will be in anyone's interest (yours or other editors') for you to continue editing this page. The UTRS system is available to you for further unblock requests, should you wish to make them. Best Girth Summit (blether) 19:40, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- UTRS appeal #47253 declined. Cabayi (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)