User talk:BlueboyLINY: Difference between revisions

Fixed your talk page archiving

Hi! I took the liberty of fixing the auto-archiving settings at the top of this page. --rchard2scout (talk) 07:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page 2022 New York gubernatorial election has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. JesseRafe (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

AN3 report and edit warring

I really need you to visit your own AN3 report and respond. SfA has been discussing on the talk page and you have not, and you are inappropriately putting warnings on their user talk page, which are reserved for malicious and/or unexplained tag removal. Regardless of whether you believe the removals to be justified, continuing this edit war is a bad idea for both of you. This behavior needs to change. Please engage on either the article's talk page or the AN3 thread, preferably both. --Chris (talk) 00:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021 Warning templates

BlueboyLINY, you need to stop leaving warning templates and start discussing. Please do not leave any more warning templates on anyone's talk page without also leaving some sort of explanation. Please do not leave any more warning templates on anyone's talk page unless you are willing to engage in a discussion either at that talk or at the article talk. When you leave a warning template, that user talk goes onto your watch list. You are expected to follow up. Leaving warning templates without being willing to discuss is disruptive. —valereee (talk) 10:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for refusal to discuss.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  —valereee (talk) 10:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I feel the block is no longer necessary because I understand why I was blocked, and will not do it again. I will continue to make productive contributions, and I understand that going forward I will need to be more proactive in talk page discussions

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I feel the block is no longer necessary because I understand why I was blocked, and will not do it again. I will continue to make productive contributions, and I understand that going forward I will need to be more proactive in talk page discussions |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I feel the block is no longer necessary because I understand why I was blocked, and will not do it again. I will continue to make productive contributions, and I understand that going forward I will need to be more proactive in talk page discussions |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I feel the block is no longer necessary because I understand why I was blocked, and will not do it again. I will continue to make productive contributions, and I understand that going forward I will need to be more proactive in talk page discussions |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

• BBLINY, you're going to need to start discussing. I've p-blocked you from article space, no objection to any other admin lifting the block once we've got this editor's attention. —valereee (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Valereee: I've given up discussing anything with user:Sucker for All, all they do is disparage other editors and claim we are spamming their talk page. It's like talking to a brick wall. BlueboyLINY (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

  Can you show me where you've tried to discuss with them? Because I haven't done a deep dive, but all I'm really seeing is a dozen warning templates on their talk page and no response to pings at article talk/AN3. —valereee (talk) 22:30, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

  https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sucker_for_All&diff=1033439718&oldid=1033182821 BlueboyLINY (talk) 22:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

  Leaving a template warning on someone's page is not "discussing." I don't really see anywhere you've attempted to have a dialog with them, you've just slapped warning templates on their talk page and walked away.

  At this point, if you really don't want to even try to work with this editor, you have two choices:

  1. You can make a report at ANI describing in detail why this editor is disruptive enough to the project that they should be blocked, or
  2. You can stop interacting with them completely. This means not reverting them and generally trying to avoid the same articles they are editing.

  Reverting them and then refusing to discuss is disruptive, regardless of whether or not you are right about the maintenance tags. --Chris (talk) 22:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

  Yes, I understand now how my not wanting to discuss with a particular editor can be seen as a refusal. I prefer the second option, to stop interacting with them completely. BlueboyLINY (talk) 22:55, 17 July 2021 (UTC)