Misplaced Pages

User talk:Tennis expert/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:Tennis expert Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:34, 19 November 2008 editTennis expert (talk | contribs)24,261 edits The dubious block that was the straw-breaking-the-camel's-back and led to my retirement← Previous edit Latest revision as of 09:38, 14 August 2009 edit undoTennis expert (talk | contribs)24,261 edits Blanked the page 
(641 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{retired|date=], ]}}

]


==The dubious block that was the straw-breaking-the-camel's-back and led to my retirement==

<div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for {{#if:24 hours|a period of '''24 hours'''|a short time}} in accordance with ] for engaging in an ]{{#if:|&#32;at ]}}. Please be more careful to ] or seek ] rather than engaging in an ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --><nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki><!-- Do not include the "nowiki" tags. --> below. {{#if:true|<small>] &#x007C; ] &#x007C; ]</small> 14:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock -->

:As clearly stated above, and in multiple edit summaries by others, linking to dates is generally not acceptable per ] and ]. Furthermore, ] on multiple articles is not acceptable, either. Further reverts on any of these changes with little to no discussion, and a continuation of your edit warring post-block, will lead to lengthier blocks. <small>] &#x007C; ] &#x007C; ]</small> 14:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

::As I and many editors have noted many times on the MOS discussion pages and at ], there has never been and is not now a consensus to eliminate '''existing''' date links, regardless of whether there is consensus to '''add new''' date links. (Regrettably, you apparently do not understand this concept as you have not actively participated in those discussions.) And as has been proven, there is certainly no consensus within the tennis project to eliminate date links for tennis articles. Regardless of whether there is consensus in the MOS '''guidelines''' (not a policy) to eliminate those links, English-language Misplaced Pages precedent is clear that a more specific consensus (for tennis articles) prevails over a more general consensus (in the MOS). I have simply been preserving the status quo in the face of tag-team disruptive editing (see ), after canvassing and '''without consensus''' by the single-purpose account ; , who often engages in blind reverts of my edits and whose legendary incivility and disruption includes, among many other things, accusing me on various discussion pages of having a mental illness and being a pig; , who often engages in blind reverts of everything I do, regardless of the nature of my edits; , whose incivility, hostility, and false accusations continue unabated and who often engages in blind reverts of my work; , who has done thousands of script-based and AWB edits on this issue despite being asked to stop; , who has done hundreds of script-based edits on this issue; , who has done hundreds of script-based edits on this issue and ignored requests to stop doing so; and, , who has done thousands of AWB-based edits on this issue. All of the preceding editors have done multiple reversions of the articles in question and should be blocked under the same (dubious) rationale. By the way, there is no editor on English-language Misplaced Pages who has done more to improve tennis biographies than myself (check out my tens-of-thousands of edits). And there are few editors besides myself who would try to uphold the core policy of Misplaced Pages concerning consensus in the face of so much hostility and incivility from the preceding editors and a few others, despite my never being hostile or incivil to them in return. This block proves that none of that matters; therefore, I am retiring from Misplaced Pages, effective immediately. But before I go, it's worth noting that the blocking administrator himself (assuming gender here) is making disruptively blind reverts of my edits, too. See, for example, , , , , , , , , and . Perhaps he should be blocked.... ] (]) 19:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

{{retired|date=], ]}}

Dude. What a totally pointless issue to retire over. Don't ]. ] (]) 19:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 09:38, 14 August 2009