User talk:Revan646

Why are you deleting all of my work?

Dear user Revan646:

I don't understand why you have repeatedly (twice) deleted hours and hours of work that I put into updating and improving Lawrence Kasdan's article. Everything was meticulously cited and relevant. Your complaint is that it's "ridiculously too long" and that I "ruined it," which I fundamentally disagree with (there is no length limit on a Wikipedia article). You also called me "a troll or stupid," which naturally offends me. I am trying to adhere to Wikipedia's policies by communicating with you directly before seeking outside arbitration, so please tell me why you undid all of my valuable contributions to this article. Tgreiving (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I keep trying to tell you, you keep filling his page up with unnecessary information while also deleting useful information like his filmography. The fact that you make it too long isn't the only reason I keep removing your stupid edits. Do you actually read and look at other Wikipedia pages on this site? I don't think you do. Can you please show me a Wikipedia page as long and bad as your Lawrence Kadan page? Revan646 (talk) 17:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles vary wildly in length and detail. I looked at several pages, not only of filmmakers but also athletes, for a reference, and some of them are very detailed and in-depth. (Look at Walter Hill's or Kobe Bryant's article, for example.) I consulted some of the professionals on the Community Portal, and they assured me that there is no length limit - one user suggested that I could keep the main Kasdan page shorter by creating a separate filmography subpage. Would that satisfy your complaint? I'm trying to adhere to the Wikipedia protocols here, and I'm also trying to ignore your incendiary language towards me, but I fail to see how my edits are "bad" simply because they are more substantial and thorough. Tgreiving (talk) 22:41, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted an official request for Dispute Resolution about this, since we appear to be at an impasse. Tgreiving (talk) 15:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See: There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Tgreiving (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lawrence Kasdan; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - Timbaaa -> ping me 01:31, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Lawrence Kasdan, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Calton | Talk 21:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did give a valid reason you moron. Revan646 (talk) 04:06, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Three things:

1) "Because I don't like it" is not a "valid reason".

2) "Valid reason" is also irrelevant, since editing decisions here are made by discussion and consensus, not by unilateral fiat. Go to the talk page and make your case SPECIFICALLY.

3) Read this link regarding personal attacks, which calling someone a "moron" is. I'm going to let it slide this time, but try that stunt again and I *will* report you and see that you're blocked from editing. And to give you the official warning:

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Revan646. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. --Calton | Talk 13:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But I didn't just write "because I don't like it". I gave valid reasons for my edits and opened a talk page to discuss it. You did neither of those things. You're a moron, deal with it. You've already been blocked before because of your bad behavior and I might be forced to block you again. Revan646 (talk) 17:59, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war about Lawrence Kasdan

Hello Revan646. Per this notice at ANI I'm letting both you you and the other party know you may be blocked if you revert again at Lawrence Kasdan before getting a prior consensus in your favor on the talk page. To find out how content disputes are usually resolved on Wikipedia, ask any experienced contributor for advice. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 20:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]