User talk:Jedi3
Brief block of massive posting actions
I just returned to the computer and noticed the recent activity of repetitive posting a MASSIVE argument on MANY talk pages and have briefly blocked you. SUCH an addition of argumentative materials to so many pages is NOT APPROPRIATE. IF you had simply posted this to a single page, with a link to it, that probably would have been acceptable — but from my perspectives, BOTH of you have been acting with extreme conceits that others on this project should be PRIMARILY concerned with your rather extreme biases and disputes. WERE that the case, you BOTH might find yourselves blocked LONG-TERM as interminable belligerents. I will very probably have to be leaving soon, so I will probably not have time to comment upon this matter much more very soon. I would recommend NOT attempting to add the material you were adding to further pages at this time, or you might find yourself blocked for more than the 15 minutes of the block I just applied, upon noticing your recent activity. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 10:24, 20 April 2018 (UTC) + tweak
- I have deleted the massive creation of talk pages you recently created for repetitious postings of your particular arguments. Such activities are generally considered disreputable disruptions on the Wikimedia projects. Were a minor wiki-link added to all the pages in contention, to a presentation of your arguments upon one of your own talk pages, or the admin notice board, or such a single page, it would probably be far more acceptable. I will probably not have a great deal of time here today, and will likely be leaving within about an hour or so, and currently must be preparing to attend to many other matters today. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 10:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- I deleted the 66 talk pages you created for posting of identical material on each of them, and am now removing this same posting from their addition to many of the pre-existing talk pages to which you posted it. I do NOT object to your posting these arguments to a single page, such as this one, and adding perhaps a one or two line link to them on various talk pages, but the massive posting of this argument to all these talk pages is extremely inappropriate. I have stated I am slightly more acceptive of some of your arguments than those of your primary adversary, but that certainly does not mean that I am acceptive of massive postings of extensive arguments everywhere you can possibly wish to post them. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 11:03, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
1 day block — for sanity's sake...
A note to BOTH Jedi3 (talk · contributions) & MonsterHunter32 (talk · contributions) on why I have initiated a block on your accounts, for the period of 1 day:
I don’t believe anyone here presently has the time to deal with your interminable and persistence arguing. I KNOW that I do NOT. I was gone much of the day, I must be leaving again very soon, and certainly do NOT have time to examine the complexities and problems of your present situations — I have noted that you have both been accusing each other of intolerable deceitfulness for weeks now, wasting very much of your own and other people's time, filling up many pages with various accusations of being persecuted and misunderstood innocents, and I perceive you both to be rather mistaken in believing either of your arguments are entirely lucid and forthright. I perceive many problems with many aspects of many of the edits made by both of you, and do not have time to present extensive indications of the extensive problems I perceive. There might be some enduring resolutions eventually attainable regarding your situations, but I believe that it cannot be made at present. I don’t have much hope for attaining them any time soon, but for now, I believe that this project would be best served without being polluted with your copious arguments for the next day. I personally do not expect to have much time to examine even your activities of the last day until then. Thus I have simply blocked both of you, and hope that sufficient understandings can arise within coming days that further or longer blocks will not be necessary. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 00:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Unfairness and injustice
Why I was blocked, and why was I blocked with the same block length as MH32?
I made a single revert in Aristotle, which was well explained, other editors have too and with very good reason reverted the 'censorship attempts' by MonsterHunter32, and were (with good reason) not blocked, see for example the latest reverts at Tipu Sultan.
MH32 has made mass reverts and massive censorship vandalism in over 100 articles and was not even blocked for it.
How can you justify this? How can you even justify that I get blocked for as long as MonsterHunter who is stalking me and mass deleting all my additions.
Unlike MH32, I was discussing extensively before doing anything.
I also asked several admins about this many times:
"On your talkpage, you said that agree that the following is valid and must be observed:
- All quotes censored by MonsterHunter32 must at the very least be moved by him to the article talkpage with a note that they were removed from the article, giving full reasoning (for each removed quote), as required by Template:Remove. Otherwise, the status quo (uncensored) version should be kept.
- I understand that means that this minimum must be observed, also by MonsterHunter32, and I will therefore restore to the status quo pre-censorship version, that is, applying Maintain WP:STATUSQUO during discussion Please let me know if you have a different interpretation of any of the above. Thanks. --Jedi3 (talk) 14:11, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
If MonsterHunter can mass delete ALL my additions in over 100 articles, and I am not even allowed to restore any of them, and I was even also blocked for my attempt to bring the issue to their talkpages, whcih MonsterHunter as a rule refuses to do, and now blocked presumbably also for bringing up the issue in discussions on noticepages, then I am effectively already banned from wikiquote. And if admins can take the time to revert my attempt to bring the issue to the related talkpages, which MH refused to do himself, can they not take the time to revert MonsterHuntes indiscriminate mass censorship in over 100 articles that he did in one hour?
All the more so because MonsterHunter has admitted on Kalkis talkpage that he is being so disruptive so that he get can get both of us blocked. His goal is to get blocked, as long as I (unfairly) get blocked too. That is why he is being so disruptive. He said, it If you want to block me you can, but please block him as well.
That is why he is doing mass censorship in over 100 articles, so he can frame me as being part of his edit-warring, that is why he is doing interminable and persistence arguing which Kalki has criticized above.
Many admins know this as I told them this already.
I find it extremely objectionable when you are making it sound like it would be fair if both of us are blocked with the same block length. i find it very objectionable when making it sound like there is any equivalence between the actions MonsteHunter32 who indiscriminately mass censors sourced quotes without explanation on talk, and another one who constantly discusses the censorship on talkpages before doing anything.
And the problem here at wikiquote is also that admins don't seem to care about it, but then still give unfair blocks. Do the admins think that the editors’ time is so worthless that users like MH32 will continue creating problems one by one, and each time others will take the pain to go to various noticeboards to seek a justice only to find that MH32 is back again with his problematic behavior? How many times do we have to come back here before we decide that this is a net negative to the project? How much time does he have to waste before enough is enough?
Last time also I was punished with the same length block when I was the one who started the discussion on the censored quotes, when I (and others) notified MonsterHunter that he must at least move censored quotes to the talkpage with full reasonsing, which he refuses to do. I did Notify you that after your warning, he continued the reverts and the edit-warring. I did ask you if Template:Remove can be enforced, to which you replied "I agree that prior to removal, since there is disagreement regarding quotes, they should be moved to the talk page where they could be discussed." Based on this, I understood that Template:Remove is valid and should be enforced. I asked for your confirmation.[8] I used the edit summary "(see User_talk:MonsterHunter32#Warning and discussion with UDScott. All quotes censored by MonsterHunter32 must at the very least be moved by him to the article talkpage with a note that they were removed from the article, giving full reasoning (for each removed quote), as required by Template:Remove. Otherwise, the status quo (uncensored) version should be kept" Prior to that I left a note and explanation on his talkpage (which he promptly deleted). Shortly afterwards I left a note on Wikiquote:Vandalism in progress. MH32 then immediately editwarred again. Then I asked on your talkpage "What else can I do if he refuses any meaningful collaboration, consensus seeking and discussion?" [9] Then I was blocked with the SAME blocklength as MonsterHunter32. I was discussing and notifying, not plain edit-warring like MonsterHunter32 but got punished the same. Just 30 minutes after you warned both of us, MonsterHunter was ignoring your warnings and continued his edit warring. On the other hand, I did all the steps specified on your talkpage. I didn't just revert like MonsterHunter who continued his edit-warring and there was no sign that anything was being sorted out and no replies when I pointed out this behaviour already long ago. I simply didn't do any of the same blatant edit-warring as MonsterHunter that others have called extremely disruptive, but got the same block. I hope admins are being more fair in the future. --Jedi3 (talk) 08:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
@Kalki: What exactly should I be doing differently? I have asked you this.
- If I discuss the issue on noticeboards, I am blocked for interminable and persistence arguing (also due to MonsterHunters reactions).
- If I attempt to start the discussion on the affected talkpages where he mass censored quotes in my way, after MonsterHunter refused to do it, I am also blocked.
- If I restore the content even only once in an article like Aristotle, as is normal practice in wikipedia and even wikiquote (except when I am doing it apparently), I am also blocked, despite all the discussion and explanation I did and despite only doing it less than one percent of the articles where MH mass deleted sourced quotes.
- If I cannot do anything about the targeted stalking and mass deletion of all my contributions, then I am effectively already banned from here. due to the actions of MonsterHunter who is stalking me out of revenge, as he explained his motivations.
- And MonsterHunter who wants to get blocked as long as I am blocked too, has been effectively helped by the admins.
- And MonsterHunter32 has mass deleted sourced content in over 100 articles without giving any reasoning on the talkpage some days ago, and nothing has been done yet.
- MonsterHunter32 censorship in over 100 articles
- Summary table of censored quotes
- I have not even done any of the unexplained massive mass removals of sourced quotes, that MonsterHunter32 did some days ago, or not even any large scale restoration (which would have been well justified) and admins still think that it is fair to block me with the same block length as MonsterHunter32. "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor."
--Jedi3 (talk) 08:17, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Interaction ban imposed
An interaction ban is hereby imposed on MonsterHunter32 and Jedi3 for the next thirty days. You are not to direct comments to each other or respond to comments by one another. You are not to make comments about one another to third parties. You are not to try to bait the other with comments suggesting that practices of the other are improper. You are not to use the e-mail feature to send emails to third parties about each other. You are not to remove quotes added by the other to any page, nor are you to restore quotes previously removed from any page by the other. Other editors will, in time, examine quotes that have been added or removed for propriety; let them do so. There are plenty of things that need doing around this project that do not require any kind of interaction. I recommend that you find those and do them. Violation of this interaction ban will result in an immediate 30 day block for the violator. That is all. BD2412 T 18:00, 22 April 2018 (UTC)