TuxedoInferno

Welcome!

Hello, TuxedoInferno, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

However...

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 03:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your inquiry

Latest comment: 18 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Well... posting a link on Anime for the sole purpose of explaining DVD cases doesn't make much sense at all. A new article about DVD cases? I'm not sure how encyclopedic that is. It may be interesting and factual, but remember, you need to keep a neutral point of view and the article has to be licensed under the GFDL in order to be eligible for inclusion on Wikipedia. If you have any more questions, please ask.

Reply has been posted on User talk:Ambush Commander. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 03:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Reply has been posted on User talk:Ambush Commander. 04:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Reply has been posted on User talk:Ambush Commander. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 22:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

It looks like, however, you've got yourself into a little edit dispute there. I urge you to show your good faith by unreverting the comment you deleted (it appears you've resolved the dispute, but people don't really look highly on the deletion of comments (esp. accusatory ones)). I am currently investigating the previous situation at Dawson College. User:Brossow seems to have acted in a very confrontational manner (based on reading the text on his talk page), even though it appears you have decided that your conduct was incorrect. Banning yourself from editing an article is not necessary, just tread more softly (you may be interested in the WP:1RR#One-revert rule) — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 02:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

For the record, AC, I made numerous grammatical, spelling, and other corrections to the article in question, which this user persistently reverted. If I was confrontational, it's because based on the page's history that's a common MO for him, repeatedly reverting others' edits with which he does not agree, regardless of improvements lost in the process. Having said that, the issue seems to be resolved. --BRossow 03:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

It appears that the after TuxedoInferno's first reversion, you used popups to revert his reversion two hours later. No communication happened during this period of time, although five minutes later, before any further edits, you posted the initial warning on TuxedoInferno's page. Afterwards, you posted the TuxedoInferno != Boss comment. TuxedoInferno does some edits to your contribution 40 minutes later, and then reverts it wholesale after that (a bit puzzling, methinks).

If my analysis is not mistaken, I think that you were a bit... erm... fast with your original two tirades (on each talk page) without assuming good faith. Both of you. (although Tux publicly stated that he had thought your edits were vandalism). Both of you got quite close to breaking WP:3RR (Tux had three clear reverts and BRossow had two + one unclear revert). Lay off the reverts! :wink: They lead to misunderstandings. I'm glad both of you resolved the issue.

Here is the viewpoint from an outside admin: it is not up to TuxedoInferno or BRossow to decide what goes in the article: in Wikipedia, we form consensus. Edit warring is detrimental to this process, and that's what happened (regardless of who's fault it was). I think that both editors had good intentions, so work together on making the article more NPOV and, overall, better. Thanks for hearing me out. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 03:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

It's my fault, I mistaken BRossow for the other party. It was an honest mistake, but, at least, we cleared that up. However, I still feel bad though for all this. Well, at least I learn things new. I think the next time, I'll just contact one of you guys if I found a problem. I give up working on that Dawson College article. (TuxedoInferno 03:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC))Reply

Add topic