Sheckygreen

March 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at She'll Be Coming 'Round the Mountain, you may be blocked from editing. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:22, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Dishonest editing

When you lie in your edit summary,[1] that looks like you know your actual edit is inappropriate, and are hoping to sneak it past other editors. I just want you to know that... they notice. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 18:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I don’t know what you’re talking about, so unless you’d like to elaborate, you can just fuck off. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

ACTUALLY, as a matter of fact, you repugnant pustule, I am realizing what you are attempting to criticize and you are wrong. I corrected a spelling error, and I corrected the tense of a phrase that had been incorrect. You can go off and fuck yourself before you make any further baseless accusations. I just want YOU to know THAT. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I have re-edited my original edit and this time included a lengthy explanation so that you will be able to understand this time. I fear that my previous failing had been assuming that my edit would not require a lengthy justification to appease dullards. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Sheckygreen, you can stop with the personal attacks immediately please or you'll find yourself blocked from editing. Thanks, stwalkerster (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I will admit that they were less than subtle, but no less hurtful than the inaccurate reporting of Mr. Quest. I should be permitted to defend myself, surely. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I would also note that nobody is arguing with my point that Mr. Quest went ahead and baselessly assumed I was working under some nefarious motive when- in reality- I was just making what ACTUALLY turned out to be a minor edit. Maybe we should be taking away editing privileges from those who would seek to threaten and accuse, such as Mr. Quest. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

No one is arguing about that because you don't seen interested in a civil discussion. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

About what? You accuse me of dishonesty because you didn’t bother to look beyond the confines of my edit, so I rightly pointed out that you are wrong and restored my edit. What is there to discuss beyond an apology from me for being rude (I am sorry) and an apology from you for assuming the worst without doing your research. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m perfectly happy to engage in a civilized debate if you, in turn, are willing to concede that your initial criticism of my edit was reactionary and biased. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, looking through your history of edits, I’m rather shocked. You seem to amend articles with all the perceived bias you assign to my minor edit, but with a far more obvious flare for the distribution of your own opinions over those of others. Those who live in glass houses, etc. etc. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Please read WP:HOUND. This kind of behavior[2][3] is also inappropriate. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m not reading that. You cannot assign me homework. No no no, but a very good try. Sheckygreen (talk) 21:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Although, if you would like, I am willing to call a truce. I can tell that editing Wikipedia is likely all you’ve had in your life for the last decade, and it would be unfair of me to try to upend that. I’m only here to correct inaccuracies about the Oscars and to read about McCarthyism- small comforts during the quarantine- but this is your livelihood. I may be visiting, but this is where you live, and the last thing I want to do is to disrespect the most important thing you have in your life. Do forgive me. Sheckygreen (talk) 21:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

And I quote:

Wikipedia has no firm rules Shortcut WP:5P5 Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold, but not reckless, in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: (almost) every past version of a page is saved, so mistakes can be easily corrected. Sheckygreen (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Its rules can be changed... but it still has them. MOS:GENDERID is one. Disregard for the "principles and spirit" of No Personal Attacks could be a bigger problem for you. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

P.S. You keep using that word ("tense"). I do not think it means what you think it means. (Hint: it refers to verbs, not people.)-Jason A. Quest (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

I would hasten to point out to you that “has no firm rules” would, by definition, negate the having of rules. There are suggestions, it seems, but no rules. Sheckygreen (talk) 19:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

And furthermore, I would again point out that the only reason we are having this discussion is because you incorrectly assumed that it was my intention to hide some malevolent detail in the article in question. I am willing to concede your point regarding the misguided rule governing the gendering of names, a rule that only serves to worsen the already weak quality of the writing on Wikipedia, if you are willing to concede that you made a mistake in your accusation. You though you were clever with you “ellipses they notice,” but you were, in fact, only jumping to conclusions. I’m sorry you’re bored. I’m sorry I’m bored. I’m sorry that I ever walked into what I assume you probably consider your “wheelhouse”. But you have been presumptive and I have been pompous. The fact of the matter is that all of this would have been avoided had you been calm and levelheaded enough to ask of my intentions rather than invent them yourself. You may have appointed yourself as some kind of self-congratulatory watchdog, but that does not grant you the impunity you imagine. That is the point.

And you’re right: I was using “tense” wrong. Silly, addleheaded me. Sheckygreen (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m nineteen, by the way. What’s your excuse? Sheckygreen (talk) 20:06, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Your age doesn't excuse anything (to be honest, I guessed 12). I'll admit that your failure to intelligibly explain your intentions in your edit summary (to the point that there was no apparent connection between what you said and what you did), your history of dishonest edit summaries, and the fact that your edits demonstrated an ignorance of both the facts ("Laurenca" was a name she briefly used) and how to refer to someone who has changed their name (she was the same person then as now)... all led me to conclude that you were doing a bad job of being sneaky, rather than just doing a bad job of editing. Mea culpa. You're old enough to learn from your mistakes. Will you? -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Heavens, what a dressing down. I suppose I’ll have to change my whole way of being oh wait it’s an argument on Wikipedia the stakes couldn’t be lower. Sure, yes, I’ll try to do a better job of editing, but let’s not pretend there’s anything grander at play here than my boredom and your sanctimony. “Dishonest” has all sorts of implications, but I would again say that you seem to be dramatizing my intentions to suit your own outrage. Dishonest? Hardly. Careless? Sounds more accurate, and a bit less indignant. And a history, you say? Goodness, I’m flattered you read up, though I continue to feel that you may be confusing my laziness for malice in your rush to condemn, well, anything. I mean, I get it. It’s a pandemic; one can’t help but invent intrigue for amusement, so you can’t be blamed for your imagination running rampant in the face of my vague edit reports. Maybe I’m KGB! Maybe I’m an alien from space! Maybe I’m someone who loves the rule of threes! Of course you’re going to pounce all over that like the tiger you are. And I mean, never mind you, look at me! Look at all the attention I’ve given you just to have some kind of argument again, to have a disagreement with someone again! I will never get these five minutes back, but they were somehow worth it. But you see, that’s my point. In a pre-quarantine world I would never have felt the need to be down here in the cesspool of human interaction- in discussions online with an ardent, middle aged, online troll- because I would be talking to human beings in the actual world and using Wikipedia as it was meant to be used: as a means of confirming trivia. That’s what Wikipedia is: it’s a handy way to see if that fact you thought you knew is close to being right, because if it’s on Wikipedia then it’s probably 75% true, and that’s what the world is willing to accept. But is that my life? Am I just occasionally looking things up on Wikipedia because I have too much to do to be spending my whole day here? No. Of course not. I’m here talking to you. And it’s been a lovely distraction. But it has not- not through any of the points rendered by either of us- been of even the vaguest importance to anyone anywhere.

Here is my vow: in order that our paths should never again cross, I will resolve to edit Wikipedia articles- likely about such sacred and serious topics as Barbra Streisand’s dog’s names or Ethel Merman’s marriage to Ernest Borgnine- following the pious example you have granted us all. I’ve seen the “rules,” firm as they are, so clarity and chronology will be eschewed and you can sleep easier in the knowledge that you’ve affected change. Or, you know, had an argument online. This is my first, but it has been fraught with drama and suspense so I get why people choose to get fat as they sit and snipe in the glow of their computer screens. Either way, you’ve filled your day and I’ve managed to add arguing on the internet (Wikipedia, no less! Who knew?) to my list of quarantine firsts, so revel and be merry- or at least as close to merry as you can muster. Snipe on, Mr. Quest; in this time of quarantine, we need you more than ever. Sheckygreen (talk) 10:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)