User talk:Delectopierre

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Awshort (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

It’s been semi-protected so I can’t respond to this there. So please allow me to do so here. You seem like a well-meaning person trying to make the world better through editing Wikipedia. You also seem very, very bad at the consensus-based system here, which requires engaging with people who revert, disagree with, correct, or challenge you with a default assumption that they are also well-meaning people trying to improve the encyclopedia. It is incredibly common for people to browse the noticeboards like NPOV — a similar behavior is how I involved myself in your threads — and so Awshort’s explanation that that’s how they found the thread is extremely plausible-sounding. Meanwhile your proposed alternative theory is based entirely and transparently on your failure to apply WP:AGF. Awshort’s decision to self-revert shows a clear attempt to not escalate a dispute with you; your failure to recognize and acknowledge that (you should have immediately added it to the ANI thread when you became aware, and probably withdrawn the whole thread) shows the opposite. Linking back to a thread where no one agreed that the behavior you were reporting had anything problematic about it is ... something, too.

In your first thread, you were rude and dismissive of a simple piece of good advice I offered you. Because you seem to be well-meaning, I am going to offer it to you again: look at the threads you’ve started at ANI and just check, for each person who’s commented, whether they appear to be encouraging you or discouraging you from your behavior. I hope that you are sufficiently competent at the necessary internet social skills to make the correct deduction, to stop reactively dismissing people who don’t immediately agree with you, and to learn how to participate in a consensus-based system where you will not always get the end result you were looking for in the beginning because other people’s objections will change your contributions for the better. If not, you will end up blocked, and that would be a shame. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 11:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Thanks for the note. I want to respond in a full, thoughtful manner, so allow me to mull it over.

In the meantime, I apologize for being rude and dismissive. It was not my intent. Delectopierre (talk) 17:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Hi @100.36.106.199,

As I mull this over, a question: Awshort’s decision to self-revert shows a clear attempt to not escalate a dispute with you; your failure to recognize and acknowledge that (you should have immediately added it to the ANI thread when you became aware, and probably withdrawn the whole thread) shows the opposite.

• Q: What makes you say that I should have withdrawn the thread? If you're willing, can you expound on that?

Thanks either way! Delectopierre (talk) 03:02, 11 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

You commented at the beginning of the second ANI thread that the first thread "did not lead to any action". This is true, but a more accurate summary of the first thread is that seven people other than you and Awshort commented in the first thread; of them, it seems to me that six told you that you were wrong in some way or other (about your failure to notify, the inappropriateness of opening an ANI thread without prior attempts at resolution, your failing to listen and learn from more experienced editors, or your misunderstanding/misinterpretation of WP:HOUND); I'm not sure what Kolano123's comment meant, but maybe it is actually 7/7. Notably, not a single person said "yes I think you have made a good point" or in any way agreed with you that Awshort's behavior was problematic. The second ANI thread has comments from four editors other than you and Awshort, with the same division of criticism directed at you and at Awshort. I think that this was entirely predictable, which is why you should have withdrawn the report. The reason it's predictable is because you are the person whose behavior is outside the WP cultural norm. Meanwhile, Awshort is doing their best to not directly antagonize you, despite the fact that your behavior is problematic (as they have explained, and as has been endorsed by the comments in the later ANI thread). 100.36.106.199 (talk) 02:15, 14 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]