User talk:TarnishedPath
This is TarnishedPath's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
Resources for maintenance and collaboration |
---|
Cleanup |
Categories |
Create an article |
Referencing |
Stubs |
Deletion |
Polishing |
Translation into English |
Images |
Controversy |
To-do lists |
Disambiguation |
More |
|
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard. |
Editor experience invitation[edit]
Hi TarnishedPath :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Criminal parameters at Donald Trump[edit]
Hello. I recently reverted the inclusion of the criminal parameters in Trump's infobox citing legitimate policy concerns. As of now, this happened less than 24 hours ago. You reinstated them without consensus soon after. This amounts to tag teaming and distorts the consensus building process. Also, violates the spirit of the arbitration restriction to follow the BRD cycle set for the Trump article. It would be a courtesy to respect the process and revert your reinstatement. Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 15:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- If you're going to accuse me of WP:MEATPUPPET, I suggest you provide specific evidence that I'm coordinating with other editors off-wiki. Otherwise I suggest you strike your ridiculous accusations. Note: there has been obvious consensus formed at Talk:Donald_Trump#What_we_do_after_conviction for the inclusion of the material in the infobox. TarnishedPathtalk 15:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Somebody added these parameters and I appropriately reverted them within policy and guideline. You then reinstated them without consensus (you can't cite an unclosed, one-day old RfC as consensus for anything). This created an edit war situation where I couldn't revert what you reinstated but you also technically avoided breaking the BRD restriction because you didn't originally add the parameters, someone else did. That's what I meant by saying it was a form of tag teaming in this context, but if there is a different understanding of it I will strike the accusation. Either way what happened was disruptive. Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 16:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Iamreallygoodatcheckers, per WP:TAGTEAM:
"Tag teaming (sometimes also called an editorial camp or gang, factionalism, or a travelling circus) is a controversial form of meatpuppetry in which editors coordinate their actions to circumvent the normal process of consensus"
. TarnishedPathtalk 16:26, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Iamreallygoodatcheckers, per WP:TAGTEAM:
- Somebody added these parameters and I appropriately reverted them within policy and guideline. You then reinstated them without consensus (you can't cite an unclosed, one-day old RfC as consensus for anything). This created an edit war situation where I couldn't revert what you reinstated but you also technically avoided breaking the BRD restriction because you didn't originally add the parameters, someone else did. That's what I meant by saying it was a form of tag teaming in this context, but if there is a different understanding of it I will strike the accusation. Either way what happened was disruptive. Iamreallygoodatcheckers talk 16:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)