User talk:Nableezy: Difference between revisions
→accusations: Reply |
→accusations: reply to Andrevan |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
:They are only aspersions if they are unsupported by evidence. I cited the evidence. The admin actually said "in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time". Yes, you are gaming, yes it is disruptive. Anything else? '''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;font-size:90%">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC) |
:They are only aspersions if they are unsupported by evidence. I cited the evidence. The admin actually said "in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time". Yes, you are gaming, yes it is disruptive. Anything else? '''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;font-size:90%">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC) |
||
::No, the admin said, "start an RFC." Are you not aware of the long-time Wikipedia norm and procedure that an RFC means the status quo remains? '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 19:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC) |
::No, the admin said, "start an RFC." Are you not aware of the long-time Wikipedia norm and procedure that an RFC means the status quo remains? '''[[User:Andrevan|Andre]]'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">[[User_talk:Andrevan|🚐]]</span> 19:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::Literally anybody can [[Special:Diff/1253710987|see]] that he said {{tq|That said, in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time. Someone should just start an rfc about the sentence in the lede of this article.}} If you are going to distort the record even now there really is nothing to speak to you about. Kindly take your leave from this page. Thank you. '''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;font-size:90%">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 19:59, 28 October 2024
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Pyramids09 (talk) 08:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Shiny thingy for you
|
A cut but still vigorous watermelon |
| For defending UNGA resolution 37/43
|
Administrator Noticeboard Notice (October 2024)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- Just a note, I am not accusing you of anything. The AN/I notice is that a media article has accused you of violating Wikipedia guidelines, and this media article was mentioned at AN/I. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- Cool? nableezy - 04:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is My involvement with ARBPIA. Thank you. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 17:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
accusations
Your repeated accusations of tendentious, disruptive, and gaming are incivil. A veteran editor should know that "the wrong version" is not gaming, it's standard rules of engagement. I started an RFC at the behest of the admin you summoned who confirmed my interpretation was reasonable. Please desist in your WP:ASPERSIONS. Andre🚐 19:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- They are only aspersions if they are unsupported by evidence. I cited the evidence. The admin actually said "in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time". Yes, you are gaming, yes it is disruptive. Anything else? nableezy - 19:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- No, the admin said, "start an RFC." Are you not aware of the long-time Wikipedia norm and procedure that an RFC means the status quo remains? Andre🚐 19:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Literally anybody can see that he said
That said, in this circumstance there is clearly no consensus to include at this time. Someone should just start an rfc about the sentence in the lede of this article.
If you are going to distort the record even now there really is nothing to speak to you about. Kindly take your leave from this page. Thank you. nableezy - 19:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Literally anybody can see that he said
- No, the admin said, "start an RFC." Are you not aware of the long-time Wikipedia norm and procedure that an RFC means the status quo remains? Andre🚐 19:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)