User talk:MisteOsoTruth

Welcome![edit]

Hi MisteOsoTruth! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 02:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dont' remember doing anything or editing anything about those who are recently deceased. I don't remember attacking an Editor. What is going on?

"Living or recently deceased." You are making allegations about living individuals.

Also, Ryulong has been blocked for nine years. You're a little late to the dance, but that's not an excuse for your aspersions. Acroterion (talk) 12:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well one i wasnt aware that person is or was ever dead. are primary sources not allowed especially if it's edits that fail wikipedia's standards? MisteOsoTruth (talk) 13:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Living or recently deceased". – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Acroterion (talk) 02:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Acroterion (talk) 02:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Codename Noreste. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ryulong is indefinitely blocked. That doesn't give you license to attack them. Acroterion (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attack? where? MisteOsoTruth (talk) 10:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

where's the attack? MisteOsoTruth (talk) 14:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. as you did here MrOllie (talk) 14:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't add text to other people's comments, don't spam old threads with screenshot links, and you've got to stop trying to debate the issue itself per WP:NOTFORUM. You are making a mess of the talk page and engaging in the same disruption that just got IP editors kicked off the talk page again. MrOllie (talk) 14:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating the same attacks on my user talk page is not helping. MrOllie (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

huh? i don't remember talking to you. least of all "attacking".what's going on? MisteOsoTruth (talk) 14:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have repeatedly accused a specific editor of having a bias, including making that comment on my user talk page. That is a personal attack, and you must stop. Focus on article content, do not discuss other editors personally. MrOllie (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hmm. i see. thank you for the explanation. MisteOsoTruth (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And then you immediately headed to the talk page to make more personal attacks and to violate BLP by accusing people of committing harrasment. MrOllie (talk) 12:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

is that how your'e weaving this? someone said a biased thing as if to dismiss out of hand ANY AND ALL other interpretations. they say something about bottom of the barrel blogs. the other source i had wasn't a blog.

Attack and harass? that's over dramatic. MisteOsoTruth (talk) 13:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What other people may or may not have said does not excuse you from the policy forbidding personal attacks. MrOllie (talk) 13:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what personal attack is it? I thought they had a bias and said it. if that's seen as "an attack" then that's a very uncharitable interpretation and... ignoring the core issue

If i say it's pretty sexist to grope a woman, is THAT an attack or accusation?

Jesus. i could play the same game and say you're attacking me now. MisteOsoTruth (talk) 13:15, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment

you keep using that word. how does Wikipedia define that? i posted what i truely believe to be a source. an archive link not a screenshot. that didn't come from a blog.

I don't know how we can keep edits and revisions that have issues. and then anything and everything pointing out those issues (even non personal attacks) is part of some conspiracy done by the right wing. MisteOsoTruth (talk) 13:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You used the word, here, and you've got to stop. You cannot accuse people (or companies, or whatever) of committing crimes on talk pages. This isn't about conspiracies, or what other people are doing. This is about what you are doing on the talk page and how it violates important Wikipedia policies. - MrOllie (talk) 13:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well they do and did harass. that was the link. even the victim has come out to speak out. BUT SOME HOW that doesn't matter?

i posted the link. there's screenshots and material evidence. and the employee of Sweet Baby Inc had posted the personal steam account of the person. They got harassed, they got false flagged. so much so that Steam had to Step in.

this is not just public information but archived. and now the sweet baby inc talk page and the formal wikipedia page ARE DEFENDING the abuser.

so no. chris kindred (@itskindred): "The @Steam curator harassment group Sweet Baby Inc detected is lead by this person, @kabrutusrambo. Here's them trying to be slick so they don't get reported. Even with the discriminatory language filed off, the group itself still fails the code of conduct." | nitter.poast.org (archive.is) MisteOsoTruth (talk) 13:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is MisteOsoTruth and Talk:Sweet Baby Inc.. Thank you.MrOllie (talk) 13:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait. This is over dramatic. you came in to my talk page. is that harassment too? MisteOsoTruth (talk) 13:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It actually isn't. In fact, for the notification of the AN/I discussion they are required to notify you in the manner they did. One thing you really should learn about Wikipedia is that, when a third party says "you went too far with this and you should stop," it is generally wise to listen to them. Simonm223 (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing Talk:Sweet Baby Inc. and Sweet Baby Inc. for a period of 2 months for disruptive editing on a contentious topic. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 02:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this is a page ban logged under the Contentious Topics procedure standard restrictions. If you wish to appeal this block, you *must* follow the process outlined here. To any reviewing administrators -- see WP:AN/I thread here for additional process-related notes.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 02:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]