User talk:Kuralesache

Mansplaining

Deprodding of Mansplaining

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Mansplaining, which you proposed for deletion. The article includes encyclopedic content beyond what a dictionary would cover. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Firefangledfeathers (talk | contribs) 16:35, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions notice

Hi Kuralesache. Please see the notice below about heightened standards of conduct in a sensitive topic area. I want to emphasize the "does not imply that there are any issues" part of this standard notice.

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. 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.

Firefangledfeathers (talk | contribs) 20:27, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Binksternet

I'm with you on the Sexism discussion (Personal attack removed)--109.52.244.252 (talk) 16:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to say I sympathize you on dealing with Bink’s bullshit lmao TheXuitts (talk) 15:15, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Hi Kuralesache! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Misogyny several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Misogyny, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. ––FormalDude talk 23:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FormalDude editors are also supposed to improve Wikipedia and those stupid fucks have no interest, so here we are Kuralesache (talk) 23:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editors have tried nicely explaining the issue with the tag. You may want to read WP:One against many. Even if you are right, it is not appropriate to edit war. ––FormalDude talk 23:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FormalDude I understand that fully, I do not think that my edit warring is an appropriate or acceptable behavior for a community member. I do not wish to be associated with this community. Thanks. Kuralesache (talk) 23:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Kuralesache reported by User:FormalDude (Result: ). Thank you. ––FormalDude talk 23:29, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Please copy my appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard or administrators' noticeboard. The length of 1 week does not adequately reflect the desire of editors to keep me from improving pages related to gender. I ask that the ban be extended indefinitely to better agree with the goals of the community. Thank you. Kuralesache (talk) 23:49, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per below where you indicate you are disrupting Wikipedia deliberately and are not interested in adhering to our policies and guidelines, and ask for an indefinite and complete ban. I can't ban you, but I am able to extend the block indefinitely. That's close to what you are asking for, so I have done so. Yamla (talk) 08:48, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} 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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

That sounds less like remorse and more like a passive aggressive guilt trip. Dronebogus (talk) 00:04, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus Yes that is correct, I am not remorseful for my actions. I am sorry if I sound passive, I think that maintaining an ideological recess of wikipedia because it suits the personal views of a majority of editors there is something that those people should feel guilty about, and I am trying to be aggressive in demonstrating that. Kuralesache (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not going to reiterate the walls of text trying to explain the situation at misogyny to you, but demanding you be blocked longer just to spite other editors is pure WP:POINT Dronebogus (talk) 00:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus Yes, that is correct, I am disrupting wikipedia to prove a point. As I'm doing my absolute darndest to demonstrate, I am not interested in being a member of Wikipedia and not interested therefore in adhering to its guidelines. I hope that this gives you the confidence you need to enforce an indefinite and complete ban. Thanks again. Kuralesache (talk) 00:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there's anything else I can do to demonstrate my disdain for the processes that support the embarrassing quality of articles on subjects regarding gender, let me know. I don't really know how I can make it any more clear that I know that I'm not allowed to do the things I'm doing and that I am doing them with the goal of securing a permanent ban. If my intentions aren't clear, it is important to me that the pages on misogyny, misandry, and related subjects be informative, neutral, and well sourced, and as long as I have an account with permissions to edit it, it will be a distraction for me, as I will feel compelled to continue to improve the pages. I do not wish to have that power as I don't have the patience to maintain 2 reverts a day indefinitely in the face of the attitudes of people who have warred against me. I cannot imagine why anyone in this community would want me to have an account either, given that I now think the processes of the community are a joke and regard them with blatant vitriol. @Binksternet @Firefangledfeathers and others can attest to their desire that I be kept from editing if you need any more justification for some reason. Kuralesache (talk) 00:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hey man, I saw the argument you had with ppl on the misogyny talk page. I honestly couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the page. It reads like a feminist wrote it. Like there wasn't any shred of effort to uphold NPOV or cite sources for extraordinary claims made. It's the same thing in the frickin misandry page. Rather writing objectively from a NPOV, someone is shamelessly playing the opression Olympics there. I just gave up totally on doing anything coz it's futile lest I get banned. I'm totally with you. Wikipedia is complete garbage sometimes. Victor obini (talk) 17:08, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]