User talk:Wikierroneous

Access to your talk page

Please provide a link to your talk page in your signature. This is expected by other active editors, and is good practice to facilitate communication with you on this collaborative project. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

@Cullen: Provide the link that says Wikipedia editors are required to link there signature to a talk page and/or that they are required to have/use a talk page. What you think or claim is expected or good practice is irrelevant. Not everyone wants to join an encyclopedia social media site. Wikierroneous 07:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

@Bbb23: I quote your post above: "Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not". What "illegitimate" use do you accuse of? Has any article, comment, talk page, or topic ever been edited by both accounts? No, it hasn't. Identify just one example of illegitimate activity. But of course there isn't any.

I used "Who R you?" until I got so p'd-off with the bs games of wikipedia (an arbitrary unjustified block proves the point) and had no wish to ever return. 1½ years later, I found issues with an article & created this account to fix that (and subsequently found errors), but given the childish crap that takes place in the rest of the WP environment, I had no intention of having talk page discussions on anything. 7 months later there were articles that had previously been edited with this account that needed updating so I used it for those changes in order to adhere with the rules against sockpuppetry. Once again, the defect in WP shows itself, where people who enjoy the thrill of the illusion of meaningless power can't even be competent enough to exercise that power properly, instead expecting others to waste their time justifying themselves, sufficient to placate the ego of someone with admin rights. There's a reason every western nation's Constitution precludes the need for people to defend themselves without a the accuser first making out their case; but, of course, WP most closely resembles an aristocratic dictatorship. And to think, Wikimedia spends money trying to determine why so many leave WP. Wikierroneous 07:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)   cc:User talk:Who R you?

Given that you acknowledge that both accounts belong to you and you've posted the identical complaint at the master account's Talk page as you've posted here, I see no need for you to have access to both Talk pages. Therefore, I've revoked your access to this page. That doesn't prevent you from discussing your block at the other Talk page as long as you do so in a non-disruptive way.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Wikierroneous. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Plusminus%

Template:Plusminus% has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)