User talk:Itagagaki

Welcome!

Hello, Itagagaki, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Lotje (talk) 05:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Drummie Zeb

The Times obituary clearly states he died on 2 September. Why are you still adding his death of death is unknown? It's in the very last line of this article [1]. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 06:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

okay, then you should have stated that The Times was the source, why didn't you? And The Times' article listed as a reference in the Wikipedia article is paid for, so that information cannot be verified. You know that, which is why you showed the archive link here instead, right? And why did you make such a lame explanation as "it's a compromise to make others happy" or "it doesn't say X person died on that date when a death is announced, doesn't mean that they didn't die on that day" when you had solid evidence? You are not explaining it well enough. Itagagaki (talk) 14:18, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I specifically mentioned it's confirmed after inserting that in the article. You should check the edit and references/citations. I also added an archive link specfically in the Times reference and here too so you can bypass the paywall link and don't need to pay for reading. You didn't check it however. That's not my fault.

And I did mean what I said to you. You're not checking the references or the edits properly. Now please stop arguing and disputing. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 17:52, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you were not lying, all you had to do was provide the basis for your statements. Yet you continued to say ludicrous things without doing so, and I continued to point them out. Please make your rationale obvious ｗhen you write something. Itagagaki (talk) 01:28, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are still some funny excuses.

"I also added an archive link specfically in the Times reference".

When and where?

If it's in this talk, it's not public, and besides, it's too late. Itagagaki (talk) 01:35, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't make it sound like my lack of confirmation is to blame for something that happened because of your own lack of explanation. Itagagaki (talk) 01:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Except it was public on the article a day before this talk started. In this edit comparison, you can clearly see an archive of the Times article being added along with the main link among the changes I made on the article [2].

You are the one who did not properly examine my edit. Which is why I left a link to the Times article on your talk too. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 06:23, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. You go to the trouble of showing a diff with references added, but the document that can be referenced from that link to The Times is paid for. Thus, it is not available for everyone to review. Itagagaki (talk) 03:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do to present the source correctly first. Then, if someone raises doubts, please calmly present your evidence. Itagagaki (talk) 03:26, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not right to claim that "it's a compromise to make others happy," even though there was a basis for it. Itagagaki (talk) 03:33, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had linked the source and it's archive link to bypass the paywall on 5 September, so people can read it for free. The source was correctly presented as a citation (they show up as the numbers in brackets next to a sentence when you read an article). You still reverted it. It's your own fault for not examining an edit. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 09:25, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I finally figured out you had placed a link to bypass the paywall with an anchor that says "Archived" and that there is an evidentiary statement on it. I admit I have not notice that "Archived" link. Then all you had to do in your discussion with me was to tell me to refer to the "Archived" link. So why didn't you do so? And why did you make such ludicrous claims as "it's a compromise to make others happy" or "it doesn't say X person died on that date when a death is announced, doesn't mean that they didn't die on that day" or some other ludicrous claim? You did not give the only explanation you should have. That's your fault. Itagagaki (talk) 01:12, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I linked the archived article to bypass the paywall in my very first comment in this discussion here after reverting you. So you'd know that there is already a source. If you can't notice a link even directly linked to you it's your own fault, just like you failed to notice the link when I added it on Drummie Zeb's article.

Also consensus and dispute resolution is the way to resolve disputes, see WP:CONSENSUS and WP:DISPUTE. There's nothing "ludicrous" in saying I'm trying to make others happy whem I'm resolving a dispute. I also said the date of death has been confirmed while providing a source, the explanation was given and you failed to understand it or check the source. Did you have anything doubting the date of death beyond your own assumptions earlier? You didn't. Blaming me won't change the fact that you don't try understanding and reading comments properly. And when pointed out you're in the wrong, you started blaming me in reaction for your faults. I can't tell you to read something if you don't want to read or fail to understand. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 20:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are desperate to justify the ludicrous excuse you have made. Itagagaki (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excuses like you failing to find the source I gave explicitly mentioning the death date both at the Drummie Zeb page before this discussion started and later right here at the very start of this discussion? And now you're blaming me when you simply don't know how to find a link. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 00:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. You do not understand I say. I can only conclude that there is nothing more I can say to you because you do not understand. Itagagaki (talk) 04:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]