User talk:Scbritton

October 2024

Hello, I'm Sir MemeGod. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparisons between Donald Trump and fascism that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SMG _chat 20:08, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I disagree with your assessment of my statement, and I direct you back to the page itself for my response. It is not a personal attack. It was very carefully worded to avoid the appearance of being a personal attack. Steven Britton (talk) 20:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:NPA forbids using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views. Your statement that

it is very reasonable and objectively true that a specific set of opinions of a certain community is very strongly linked to the use of pronouns. Which is the basis behind the need to call their motivations into question

is a clear violation of policy. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

The argument is moot. I removed the point.

However it was NOT an ad homenim, nor was it intended as one. Steven Britton (talk) 20:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Despite removing the personal attack, you've commented alluding to your original point, repeating that you think it was accurate, and continuing to call motivation into question. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:25, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Even though I don't agree with him, he does have some good and detailed points he brought up to page to the overwhelmingly keep ones. Apart from the they/them thing I think it should stay. 2A04:4A43:969F:FAC0:6184:5359:3555:1C9A (talk) 20:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Please do not delete or alter legitimate talk page comments from other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparisons between Donald Trump and fascism. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

The intent was simply to return to the original discussion rather than derail over a debate regarding whether something was, or was not a personal attack. It really added nothing more to the conversation, since my prior statements had been altered by SMG anyway. Steven Britton (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

ANI discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SMG _chat 20:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:04, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

DELETE MY ACCOUNT

Please delete my account. Clearly Wikipedia is not a place for me, and I will make a point of never returning. Steven Britton (talk) 01:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Accounts cannot be deleted for copyright related legal reasons. Whenever you edited, you accepted the following legal language: By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 4.0 License and the GFDL. Just stop editing. Cullen328 (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I don’t care about any of that. None of my edits appear on Wikipedia anyway. I just no longer want my name associated with this place in any way, shape, or form. Steven Britton (talk) 01:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Then stop editing. Cullen328 (talk) 02:40, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

So you keep saying. I can’t edit anyway.

incidentally, what is the the link to the form requesting a username change? Wikipedia Is Trash (talk) 02:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Your talk page access has been revoked. Please read WP:UTRS for your options going forward. Cullen328 (talk) 03:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)