User talk:Vometia/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Vometia. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Reprimands, praise, expired offerings of cheese etc go here. So far I have collected one telling off. Yay me.
December 2017
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Emily Blunt. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:49, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not entirely sure how my edit is classed as "unconstructive": it seems that her nationality has been an inexplicably contentious matter and other sites simply list her as British. I have not engaged in edit-warring and have not previously edited this topic, so your warning seems to be rather premature and antagonistic. -- Vometia (talk) 22:00, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Vometia: there is a consensus on the article's talk page to describe the person one way; in the article itself, it references this discussion and asks people to start a new discussion if they disagree. You have ignored this standing consensus and changed it anyway. I suggest you start a discussion on the talk page and get consensus for your change. Ignoring consensus like this generally is not helpful. Consensus is how Wikipedia articles are written. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:05, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- I've added to the discussion, but may I suggest that starting off with an accusation of disruptive activity and threatening to block me was perhaps not very conducive. -- Vometia (talk) 22:12, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Addendum: I note I have previously commented on it and forgot. :/ Still, be that as it may, I still think that the subject could have been broached more diplomatically and consider the article to be misleading in its current form. -- Vometia (talk) 22:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
... also wonders to herself when assume good faith stopped being a thing... :/
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |