User talk:HoratioS

HoratioS, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi HoratioS! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:04, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Hello, I'm Oshwah. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar‎‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. The1337gamer (talk) 15:23, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. The1337gamer (talk) 11:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The1337gamer, Your comments violate WP:NPA. Please consult the guidelines; I am well within my rights to delete your personal attacks on me. HoratioS (talk) 11:42, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar, you may be blocked from editing. The1337gamer (talk) 11:41, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The1337gamer, Your comments violate WP:NPA. Please consult the guidelines; I am well within my rights to delete your personal attacks on me. HoratioS (talk) 11:42, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well informed of the guidelines. Don't lecture me. I've made no personal attacks. Continue edit warring and deleting my comments and you'll be blocked. --The1337gamer (talk) 11:44, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar. The1337gamer (talk) 11:45, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are not legitimate talk page comments, they are your own personal attacks against me. Your comments violate WP:NPA. Please consult the guidelines; I am well within my rights to delete your personal attacks on me. HoratioS (talk) 11:48, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Katie^talk 12:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

HoratioS (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My last edits have been centered around removing a personal attack on me by The1337gamer on Talk:Grimoire:_Heralds_of_the_Winged_Exemplar. The1337gamer's comment was deeply offensive and I feel completely within my rights to delete it in accordance with WP:NPA. The1337gamer then continued to restore his offensive lines, accusing me of trolling and being affiliated with a site I am not affiliated with in an attempt to discredit me. He tried to use the time of my registration as "proof" that I am affiliated with another site, and claimed that "the overly friendly and formal tone of [my] talk page comments is bordering on trollish". The1337gamer's statements are completely untrue to the effect of smearing my reputation. I believe that I was fully justified in removing them in accordance with WP:NPA: "Personal attacks harm the Wikipedia community and the collegial atmosphere needed to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by any editor. ". Addition: Please note that The1337gamer is still continuing to make the same personal attacks below. They are completely inappropriate and completely unfounded. I do not know what motivates him, and have no knowledge of ever talking to The1337gamer before he launched this attack on me. Please note that The1337gamer has now completely derailed discussion on the Grimoire talk page, encouraging other users to treat his attack as a 3O on my edits on the page and questioning whether I have another wikipedia account. I do not have another wikipedia account, but I am powerless to reply to attacks against me because they are not being made on an appropriate page (as instigated by the original comments made by The1337gamer) and I have been blocked from posting there. Thank you for your patience in handling this matter. HoratioS (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

No longer blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Smearing your reputation"? You literally created an account to write bias on a Wikipedia article so you could annoy people on a forum: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/grimoire-now-has-a-wikipedia-article.117933/, which has consequently led to an edit war on the article and it being full protected. It obvious from your edits and account time creation explained in my post that you have ulterior motive and are not here to contribute to the encyclopedia. --The1337gamer (talk) 12:20, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not frequent the forum you are citing, and I am not affiliated with it. Where is this attack coming from, and how does it meet the guidelines of WP:NPA? What does my account creation time tell you about my motive? How can you claim that my contributions to wikipedia are not based on a desire to contribute to wikipedia? I do not understand what has motivated this all-out personal attack against my person. HoratioS (talk) 12:27, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You don't frequent the forum, yet your first ever edit on Wikipedia is to state that it is an alt-right website. What an odd edit to make. I'm sure that wouldn't annoy any of the forums users over there. Especially the ones reading the thread that was made shortly before about the article you changed. No personal attacks. Logical conclusion made from accurate observations. --The1337gamer (talk) 12:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion of the Codex is based on unprofessional opinions[1][2] posted on numerous other internet sites that I do frequent. Googling "RPG Codex alt-right" yielded various other sources. I placed "alt-right" in place of the original "niche" by Hazarasp because I recognized that the term "niche" needed clarification. As my first edit on wikipedia, it did not meet the standards of professional sourcing and was subsequently changed. Now you seek to publicly shame me for that and make generalised allegations that have no basis in reality. I do not frequent the Codex forums because I am not affiliated with the Codex or with the alt-right (which in either case is a totally inappropriate subject for discussion on the Grimoire talk page). If it is a logical conclusion, then please deliver the facts that lead you to that conclusion. All I see are unfounded accusations and allegations. HoratioS (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On reflection, I think my judgment in this argument has been imprecise. The1337gamer, you cite my use of the term "alt-right" as evidence that I frequent the Codex; I maintain that I do not. However, it seems to me that you are a reader of the Codex yourself. I notice that you refer a specific thread on the Codex: "Account was created 18 minutes after the thread posted on Codex[3]"[4]. How did you come across that "thread posted on Codex"? You also address the Codex community directly from the talk page: "Finally, for you lot at Codex because it doesn't look like most of you have figured it out."[5] Is it customary for wikipedia editors to directly address an online community on an article talk page? If you want to make allegations of bias against people who display some knowledge of the Codex, I suggest you start with yourself. It seems to me that you both read the site's forums and communicate with their user base; I am doing neither. HoratioS (talk) 13:32, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why on Earth would you label a video game forum cited in a video game article with the term "alt-right", based on opinions that you've read on other video game forums? How is changing "niche" to "alt-right" clarification? Your justification is weak and it is one of the dumbest changes I've ever seen on Wikipedia given that it only serves to antagonise the forums users who are coincidentally discussing and highlighting sentences that you've specifically added to the article at the very same time. I don't care about you or shaming you. The only reason I intervened because you starting an edit war by baiting users on a forum, continued edit warring with them after I warned you, and now the talk page discussion is going absolutely nowhere. You can continue wasting your time making a mess of the article and arguing over trivial things if you want. I've said all I need to. A competent editor will come along and rewrite it properly later on after you've had your fun. --The1337gamer (talk) 14:13, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You make wild accusations against me in a public space, I ask to you supply evidence for them, and you respond with "I don't care about you " and "I've said all I need to." I think you have been arguing in bad faith from the start and I welcome the cessation of our communications. Have a nice time on wikipedia. HoratioS (talk) 14:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]