User talk:BoldGnome

Please be careful about what you say to people. Some remarks can easily be misinterpreted, or viewed as harassment. Wik.ipedia.Pro is a supportive environment, where contributors should feel comfortable and safe while editing. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, I think you're veering into harassment. Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're really going to need expand on that, sorry.

I'm trying to edit one article in good faith that one editor, who happens to be administrator, feels ownership over and has attacked anyone who has attempted to improve it. Does this administrator have a free reign to attack other editors on talk pages of articles and edit their comments after other people have responded to them? Is it harrassment to ask them not to do that? BoldGnome (talk) 03:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And you're being remarkably hostile. I will block you from Daniel Case's talkpage if you harass him again, and if you keep sniping about talkpage conduct, from the article talkpage. You're drastically overreacting and making personal attacks. Dial it back, and concentrate on the article, not demands that other editors conform to your wishes. His administrator status is not a matter of interest, he is acting as a regular editor. I am acting as an administrator to deal with your conduct, which seems to be trying to leverage a squabble over talkpage edits into winning an editing dispute. Acroterion (talk) 03:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to "leverage a squabble over talkpage edits into winning an editing dispute". The other non-Daniel Case participant on the talk page agrees with me. So that's a completely unsupported personal attack.

This is the behaviour that you're protecting when you say I "keep sniping about talkpage conduct" and accuse me of harrassment for my first post on Daniel's page:

• [1]
• [2]

Maybe I've misread the TPG - is it appropriate to comment on other commenters on article talk pages in the Daniel has here?

Any thoughts on Daniel repeatedly referring to me by my old username, Acroterion? BoldGnome (talk) 03:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You’ve misread TPG and are getting hung up on a trivial complaint about someone who was editing in good faith and with whom you disagree. This is a collaborative project. As for usernames, I was not aware of any issue. You appear to be editing with a chip on your shoulder. It’s a problem that can be de-escalated, and you don’t need to argue with everybody. If your suggestions find consensus, they will do so without fuss. Acroterion (talk) 03:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, there are no/trivial behavioural issues displayed in these diffs: [1] [2]. Apologies to Daniel! Thank you for your assistance, Acroterion. BoldGnome (talk) 04:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not worth all this, and not an excuse to retaliate. Feel free to chill, and remove this discussion at your discretion. Acroterion (talk) 04:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Acroterion, I'm a little lost as to how I should best respond to this comment on the same talk page? I know I can't ask him to retract on his talk page and I'm 100% certain that responding in kind will result in me being blocked, so I'm genuinely very confused as to how you expect me to respond. Any assistance would be much appreciated.

Like, can I respond to the article talk page comment on his talk page? I'm really in a bind here. BoldGnome (talk) 05:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By not finding a reason for umbrage? By acknowledging that your edits on the talkpage and on his talkpage were an overreaction in a matter that would normally not be noticed, or be ignored, or at worst dismissed as a misunderstanding? You are going out of your way and wasting thousands of valuable bytes to wrangle this when we're supposed to be writing an encyclopedia. People sometimes disagree and are sometimes less than kind about it. We are well into "somebody on the Internet disagrees with me and I'm not letting it go" territory. Changing or removing someone else's edits in a situation where you are directly involved is a far greater sin than amending what amounts to an edit proposal after it's been commented upon, in response to comments. Acroterion (talk) 12:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "harrassment" in question: [3] BoldGnome (talk) 04:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, Acroterion thinks this is merely "disappointing" and hats it and suggests someone take it to Dispute Resolution of all places. 2007 admins of a feather stick together. This website is not worth anyone's time. BoldGnome (talk) 05:22, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 Wik.ipedia.Pro 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 2024 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]