User talk:Dude0001

Welcome
Hi, welcome to ! Thanks for your edit to the Royal Knights page.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Ryo205 (talk) 02:25, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Blocked
Did I do something wrong? I didn't edit war did I? If so, I am really sorry. Dude0001 (talk) 09:07, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

Well I don't know who Jdogno7 is but I didn't mean to edit war. How did I not listen to others? Dude0001 (talk) 23:37, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * ...dude, I literally explained above how you were edit warring, and you continued to do it. If anything, the fact that you don't seem to have paid any heed to what I posted above is a perfect illustration of how you don't listen to others. Your behavior was unacceptable. I'm sorry, but you are no longer welcome on this wiki. 00:40, December 5, 2014 (UTC)

"If another editor removes your edit and cites the problems with it, never, ever, ever, reinstate that edit until you have discussed the issue on the article talk page with them, and provided sources -- especially if you were reverted by a staff member. Your saying "why is this wrong?" without seeking consensus first, especially when I stated what was wrong is infuriating, and is considered vandalism on pretty much any wiki.":

I did take into account the problems cited. We did discuss the issues on talk pages. Okay, not for Midnight/Twilight (article page) but I would have if it was clear it wasn't going anywhere. For the record, I do concede on the discussion concerning that article's content, even if I still disagree. The Monimon (Xros Wars) and Monitamons (Xros Wars) articles were handled fine. Was there any problems there? For Sparrowmon (Xros Wars), I provided sources. When there was still a problem, I left a message on Lanate's talk page. For Nene Amano, I provided sources. For Damemon (Xros Wars), I provided sources. For Tyutyumon (Xros Wars), I provided sources. When there was still a problem, I left a message on Lanate's talk page. I did discuss the issues and provide sources concerning those seven articles. I have conceded on the Apollomon (Species) article page. For the Digimon Hunt article, I did take it to the talk page. The DigiQuartz article was handled fine. Was there any problem there? For the Digital World (Xros Wars) article, I did take it to the talk page. For the Ewan/Yuu Amano, the Apollomon (Xros Wars) and Whispered articles: I never got the chance to resolve them. I have taken the Whispered discussion to the talk page. I would have done so for Apollomon (Xros Wars) as well. Both Olegmon (Xros Wars) and NeoVamdemon (Xros Wars) are fine. The Royal Knights article page is fine as well. I left a message on your talk page concerning Quartzmon (Xros Wars II). You never answered.

So in summary:

Monimon (Xros Wars), Monitamons (Xros Wars), DigiQuartz, Olegmon (Xros Wars), NeoVamdemon (Xros Wars), Royal Knights- are all fine.

Midnight-issue conceded (agree to disagree). Apollomon (Species)- issue conceded.

Digimon Hunt, Digital World (Xros Wars)- Took to the talk page.

Sparrowmon (Xros Wars), Tyutyumon (Xros Wars), Quartzmon (Xros Wars II)-Left messages on Admins' talk pages to get clarity on what was still wrong.

Nene Amano, Damemon (Xros Wars), Apollomon (Xros Wars)- Was going to take to the talk page if given the chance.

Ewan/Yuu Amano, Whispered-Further debate required.

So in further summary: Out of 18 articles: 6 articles-fine. 2-issue conceded. 2-Took to the talk page. 3-Left Messages on Admin's talk pages to get clarity on what was still wrong. 3- Was going to take to the talk page if given the chance. 2- Further debate required.

So in even further summary:

I was only going to reply with further debate on Yuu/Ewan and Whispered. For Whispered, it was already on the talk page.

"You should never add your own claims to the wiki. Provide the source for what you are adding either through storylink or a standard wiki citation. 90% of the stuff you added was completely made up by you, and either not explicitly supported by the official material, or outright refuted by it. That you, again, reinstated your false information when I pointed out your information contradicted official material is unacceptable.": I provided the source through both (story link and standard wiki citation) in the end. I proved in many cases how it wasn't false information and provided sources to back it up in the end.

Dude0001 (talk) 02:36, December 5, 2014 (UTC)
 * ..."discuss" does not mean "post a question asking "why is what I did not ok", ignoring the explanations that have already been given, and then repeat the edit without waiting for consensus. Which is what you did on each of those pages.
 * IF YOU REPEAT A REVERTED EDIT BEFORE OTHER EDITORS TELL YOU IT IS OKAY, THEN YOU ARE EDIT WARRING.
 * I'm not sure how much clearer I can make this. 06:15, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

"discuss" does not mean "post a question asking 'why is what I did not ok',…": I know that.

"ignoring the explanations that have already been given,...": I didn't ignore them. I may not have agreed with some of them but I didn't ignore them.

"and then repeat the edit without waiting for consensus. Which is what you did on each of those pages.": Which pages exactly? I don't think that happened on all of them if on any of them (I don't know which pages that occurred).

"IF YOU REPEAT A REVERTED EDIT BEFORE OTHER EDITORS TELL YOU IT IS OKAY, THEN YOU ARE EDIT WARRING.": Well what if the editor who reverted it was wrong and you were right?

Dude0001 (talk) 07:30, December 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * each page lanate reverted was one you had done that on.
 * by asking "why" as if we havent already given an explanation, you are ignoring the explanation - whether or not you actually read it. Once a rationale has been given, it is on you to address it.
 * in the fictional universe where that happens, you leave your response to the staff on the talk page, and wait for enough other editors to add to that with persuasive arguments until the community consensus is on your side. Under no circumstances do you readd the edit without community approval.
 * if thats not quick enough for you, you start your own wiki elsewhere, as ive recommended before. 03:04, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

"each page lanate reverted was one you had done that on.": Well in the case of Sparrowmon (Xros Wars) I was merely trying to understand what was wrong with what I had done after having provided a source for my argument. Likewise with Tyutyumon (Xros Wars).

"by asking "why" as if we havent already given an explanation, you are ignoring the explanation - whether or not you actually read it. Once a rationale has been given, it is on you to address it.": I wasn't ignoring the explanation. I was merely trying to clarify or understand where it wasn't clear. Once a rational was given, I did address it. I am continuing to do so right now.

"in the fictional universe where that happens, you leave your response to the staff on the talk page, and wait for enough other editors to add to that with persuasive arguments until the community consensus is on your side. Under no circumstances do you readd the edit without community approval.": "in the fictional universe where that happens,…": What is that supposed to mean? How long do I wait for? A week? A month? A year? Seriously, what is a good period of time to wait for if nobody responds at all?

Dude0001 (talk) 04:36, December 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * and that was unacceptable edit warring.
 * on the article talk pages, you simply asked "why" instead of attempting to address the reasons given. That is insulting.
 * UNTIL. YOU. RECIEVE. COMMUNITY. APPROVAL. If that takes forever, you either deal with it or start a separate site. Even the admins have to deal with that. I have requests in that have lasted as long as ive been here. 20:31, December 7, 2014 (UTC)

I left messages on Lanante's talk page concerning both Sparrowmon (Xros Wars) and Tyutyumon (Xros Wars). How is that edit warring?

I did address the reasons given. I finally asked what was wrong when no further reason were given. For both Digital World (Xros Wars) and Digimon Hunt, I finally asked what was still wrong after having addressed everything that was already pointed out. On the Digimon Hunt article, your last revert stated "rv vandalism" in response to my questions "Well where is it indicated that Ken is the leader of that team? Why list the allied Hunters in order of appearance? Why not in order of significance as characters? Likewise with the main member of Xros Heart: Tagiru, Ewan/Yuu and Mikey/Taiki.", you never gave me an answer. Likewise with the Digital World (Xros Wars) article, you didn't answer my questions in relation to my attempt to address the reasons given. With Quartzmon (Xros Wars II), I asked "What about Metamormon? How is this abusing the info box?" You haven't given me an answer to that. Even when I left a message on your talk page.

Dude0001 (talk) 00:03, December 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's edit warring because you readded your version without community approval. It does not fucking matter that you left a message on Lanate's page at the same time -- that is step one in the process, as I've stated many times. By readding your version of the page without actually obtaining community approval, you edit warred, which is vandalism.
 * You didn't address any of the stuff that was pointed out because you didn't discuss your changes on the talk page. And by the way, I've been explaining here why most of your edits were incorrect -- that you still refuse to connect the dots of my explanations with why your edits were considered vandalism is very troubling.
 * YOU. ARE. NOT. ALLOWED. TO. UNDO. AN. ADMIN. REVERT. WITHOUT. COMMUNITY. APPROVAL.
 * Leaving a message on a talk page does not complete that process. It is a very small portion of obtaining approval. Trying to resolve the admin's objections to your personal satisfaction does not complete that process -- you must obtain community approval to make sure you understand the consensus before editing.
 *  If you do not have the patience to wait for community consensus, then your contributions are not welcome on this site. 
 * I will no longer be responding on this page -- I have clearly stated the rules regarding edit warring and consensus several times. If you are still confused, re-read this page, or research the relevant policies on wikipedia. Until you have become experienced with how consensus works, you are not welcome on this wiki. 05:56, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I understand now what I didn't before. I will take into account everything you have said during this discussion. Even if I can't come back to this wiki in future.

Dude0001 (talk) 07:02, December 8, 2014 (UTC)