BiggerAristotle

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, BiggerAristotle! Thank you for your contributions. I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Marek.69 ^talk 22:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Sonny Bill Williams

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Sonny Bill Williams". Thank you. --AIRcorn (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. BiggerAristotle (talk) 11:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Response

Ive noticed you've had a dispute about this before, Tell me why do you feel the need to delete referenced information off an article? Goldblooded^{Return Fire} 22:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. The questions I asked you were: what was your objection to my edit there about off-field controversies? [1] And why did you refer to WP:NEUTRAL in your edit summary? I'm not sure how that applies. In addition, I'm not clear what referenced information you think I removed from that section? If you let me know what you object to me removing, I can probably explain why. (The fact that something is referenced, or at least an editor points to a reference for it, doesn't of itself mean the material should be in an article.) Cheers. BiggerAristotle (talk) 22:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

SBW and boxing detail

Moved to article talk page. Hope you don't mind. BiggerAristotle (talk) 13:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Barbarian F.C. info-box.

So you disagree with the info-box edit? Did you even follow the link given in my edit summary? If so, then you will have seen that at least 1 other editor supports my edit. So you have no right to take such hasty unilateral action without further consulting myself and the other editor. Secondly, there are plenty more rugby players who have the same info-box edit. So are you inclined towards editing all these info-boxes as you have done for SBW?Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 01:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Please do not lecture me about what rights I have. You are a single issue editor who seems to struggle with working collaboratively. I suggest you read the relevant policies to avoid embarrassing yourself.

You opened a discussion at the talk page for another article, not the correct place, and one other editor agreed with you there. You then opened a discussion at the RU project and also didn't wait for any responses before making the change to the Williams article. Rather than wait for proper discussion and maybe consensus at the relevant article, you reverted again. You have now reverted twice on the same point - please be aware of WP:3RR or you may find yourself blocked. Read WP:BRD - you made a change, it was reverted, now it is incumbent on you to discuss and reach consensus at the appropriate place before restoring it.

Unless you can get consensus for your preference at the talk page for the article, please do not restore it. BiggerAristotle (talk) 03:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

You are the only one who “seems to struggle with working collaboratively”. You do not need to threaten me with WP:3RR because you have reverted 3 times already on an issue where I consulted before I added the Barbarian team and received approval. So perhaps you may find yourself blocked. Can you show me any policy that would support your stance against myself and User talk:FruitMonkey that accepts putting the Barbarians under club/team? And you did not answer my question: are you now going to go through the many players who have Barbarians on their page under club/team? Or does removing it only from SBW fire you up?Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 04:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

There is no point in me arguing on the details of this stuff with someone who is so wilfully obtuse.

Read WP:BRD. Then discuss the changes you want at the appropriate talk page. Agreement from one editor at another talk page does not in any way amount to consensus for your view.

Then, please, read WP:OWN. BiggerAristotle (talk) 05:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes-you-are-correct

You are correct. I tried finding a hyphenated drink driving searching Google, but nothing showed up. I guess Wikipedia was wrong after all, which is disappointing. However, your hysterical comment on my page was uncalled for.Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

My comment was neither hysterical nor uncalled for. Seriously, you were edit-warring over a hyphen and hadn't even bothered to Google it. Similarly, you reverted my BBC/Rugby League World edit without bothering to check the facts with a quick web search. It seems you're more concerned with reverting edits I make than you are with getting the facts correct. Still, all's well that ends well. BiggerAristotle (talk) 12:06, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

No I am not more concerned with reverting edits you make. I am more concerned about adding accurate information and I will even fight over a hyphen if I think it to be more accurate. Having said that, you are correct that I should have done some meaningful research, and hopefully I will not make that mistake again.Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 22:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Whatever you say. Your actions show that you clearly were more concerned with edit warring with me than you were with checking the facts. You reverted three times over a hyphen, and once over the 'Rugby League World' World 13, without checking either point. If you cared about accuracy as much as you say, you would have done a web search on both points. How you might think that a hyphen was 'more accurate' and worth fighting over if you hadn't checked anywhere is beyond me. Probably best to move on. BiggerAristotle (talk) 23:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)