Content deleted Content added
→June 2024: note |
→June 2024 2: Reply |
||
Line 71:
{{u|ExplodingCabbage}}, I'd normally recommend discussion and limit the block in a way that allows you to still discuss the matter on talk pages, but I'm afraid that this would encourage [[sealioning]] and a [[WP:IDHT|failure or refusal to "get the point"]]. [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 13:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{unblock|reason=There was no justification for this block in the first place. The edits I was blocked for were clearly beneficial, implemented the consensus reached after discussion on the article's talk page, and were reverted on false, bad faith grounds by an editor who - despite my best efforts - refuses to engage in any meaningful discussion about them and who has over the past several days engaged in a pattern of abusive behaviour towards me. It was his undoing of my edits while refusing to discuss them or articulate any coherent and truthful reason for objecting to them that was disruptive, not my implementing or re-implementing them, and I have done everything I possibly can in the circumstances to engage in constructive discussion. I should be unblocked and allowed to reimplement those changes, which have the support of those who have discussed them on the article's Talk page and for which no good objection has so far been raised.
:More detail:
:The changes that triggered @[[User:FlightTime|FlightTime]] to warn me for "edit warring" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom&diff=1230418265&oldid=1230300962) and the reimplementation of those changes after they were reverted that finally triggered this block (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1230549661) both implemented consensus, reached unopposed on the article's Talk page, to:
:1. remove, or else re-source, claims for which the Daily Mail was the only source, and
:2. use a consistent style for the "Date" column in the table in the article (which previously was inconsistent about listing either the date when the victim was attacked or the date when they died)
:To date, @[[User:FlightTime|FlightTime]] - the editor who has repeatedly reverted these changes - has not articulated any coherent, truthful objection to these changes, despite my multiple attempts to engage. Instead he has sworn at and threatened me here on my Talk page and accused me of a slew of offences including harassment. Multiple users have agreed that these changes should happen; the only opposition is his, and he is unwilling to engage in any sensible discussion about it.
:His reverts of my changes, and his untruthful justifications for them in edit summaries, occurred in the context of a pattern of abusive actions towards me and false statements - CTRL-F on my Talk page for "You have repeatedly treated me with rudeness and hostility" to see a list - and he gave entirely false reasons for them in his edit summaries on both occasions, first claiming (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1230463057) that my edits were unsourced OR and next (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1230566485) that they are "POV trolling". Prior to reverting the edit claiming my changes were unsourced OR, I posted on his Talk page listing every change of mine that he had reverted and the cited sources that corroborated it (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FlightTime&oldid=1230549833#Reverted_edits_to_List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom); his response to this was simply to delete my post and adding an "only warning" here characterising that post as purposeful and blatant harassment. As for the claim that my edits are "POV trolling", I think that simply glancing at them will show that this is not the case; there is no contentious political or ideological content to them at all.
:For ''me'' to be the one being blocked in these circumstances, when I have spent many hours and great amounts of effort trying to engage in any meaningful discussion of the article with @[[User:FlightTime|FlightTime]], strikes me as an obvious injustice that in no way benefits the article in question. This block should never have been issued.
:}} [[User:ExplodingCabbage|ExplodingCabbage]] ([[User talk:ExplodingCabbage#top|talk]]) 15:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
| |||