User talk:AHI-3000

Acronyms

Hi! I saw a comment from you at WP:RFPP that you were having trouble with some of the acronyms used at Wikipedia. We do love to throw those around! I've been here over 19 years, and I still have moments of "what the heck is she even talking about with that alphabet soup??" Anyway, most of the time, there's a page associated with an acronym. You can find it by using the search box and typing in "WP:insert acronym here", and you'll be sent to the appropriate explanatory place. Cheers! Joyous! Noise! 17:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks, duly noted. AHI-3000 (talk) 17:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for editing the Superman article

File:Justice League - The New 52 (Jim Lee's art).png	The super-award
	Thanks for editing on the Superman article!! :) Babysharkboss2 (talk) 18:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. AHI-3000 (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you populate the Children by cause of death categories?

Thanks for making the Children by cause of death categories. I think it's a good idea to diffuse them. Could you populate those categories a bit more? Particularly, Unsolved child deaths and Drug-related deaths? Those seem particularly vulnerable to accidentally getting emptied.Mason (talk) 03:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: You're welcome. I think I will indeed take a look at diffusing this category more sometime later soon. Maybe make more subcategories too. AHI-3000 (talk) 08:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion (currently active discussions)

Page creation list (complete list)

Category:Slavery by war has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 01:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional female mass murderers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:12, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional female swordfighters has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional female gunfighters has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting edits at Category:Fictional exorcists

I think I explained pretty clearly why your category additions are incorrect, but you have re-added them several times now. I will try to explain in detail so hopefully you can get why I think this is totally wrong.

"Demon hunters" - Exorcists fight demons, but do not always "hunt" them down. Often they are just passive and called to respond to someone being possessed.

"Ghost hunters" - Again, "hunting" is not necessarily taking place.

"Paranormal investigators" - This is a completely different occupation than an exorcist. Usually they simply investigate for evidence.

I fully admit that I may be wrong, but you have not attempted to gain consensus for your introduction of new categories while continuing to edit-war. This is a valid discussion about an edit you introduced, so if it gets deleted from your page at random, I will consider it WP:BADFAITH battleground editing and report it to an admin. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war? You just suddenly resurrected something that already happened 10 months ago. AHI-3000 (talk) 18:11, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and the talk page consensus was two editors against, one editor for (you). If it was a done deal, it ended not in your favor. You added the categories back anyway. User:Smasongarrison stated essentially the same thing as me, which is that parent categories should encompass most or all of the subcategory's members. You seem to have a habit of adding parent categories if they might describe even a few members of the subcategory, but that is not how the system works. Instead, each of those specific members should be in both categories. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They also have the habit of slow category edit warring and refusing to look at the category history. I can't imagine that it's because they forgot... it's pretty clear that they're refusing to actually seek/respect consensus. ^SMason_Garrison 02:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: That much is obvious since they have reverted my attempts to fix things numerous times, but rarely ever tried to discuss it, only reverting it until I gave up. And the typical response to any CfD (of which there are many - see talk page history) is just to disagree without trying to understand why it is happening.

Sadly, all my attempts to report things were ignored. If you want try it, I'd gladly support it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:32, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand exactly what your countless CFD proposals were, most of them were just subjectively arbitrary nitpicking. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems more like WP:IDHT. You know what the problem is, and yet you refuse to acknowledge or seek consensus. ^SMason_Garrison 03:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zxcvbnm, Is there a step prior than ANI? They've refused to actually discuss the merits. ^SMason_Garrison 03:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An individual admin could be notified instead, though that's pretty much the same level more or less. The in between step is discussion... but IMO they are kind of beyond that unless they suddenly change their entire editing habits. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's worth trying. Do you have an admin in mind? Because maybe a third part can at least give me a sanity check, because I find this kind of behavior extremely disruptive. ^SMason_Garrison 03:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zxcvbnm Well, it's pretty clear that AHI-3000 is unwilling to take feedback from us. Did you try an ANI already? Because I've tried an edit war report already. ^SMason_Garrison 13:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Category:Fictional exorcists. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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. ^SMason_Garrison 03:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, we're in the middle of a conversation about you edit waring, and you revert the change back instead of actually discussing the issue? ^SMason_Garrison 03:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you refuse to consider anyone else's opinion and why you refuse to consistently explain your edits or why you insist on slow edit warring. ^SMason_Garrison 03:23, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like what is so difficult about seeking consensus? ^SMason_Garrison 03:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already gave edit reasons on that category's page history more than once. I wasn't the one who just suddenly passive-aggressively revived an old dispute from 10 months ago on a whim. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giving reasons on the page edit history is not sufficient, you need to actually engage with other people. " use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors" ^SMason_Garrison 03:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: and @Zxcvbnm: Why don't we just get straight to the point? I stand by my point that Category:Fictional exorcists is a subtype of Category:Fictional demon hunters and perhaps Category:Fictional ghost hunters too. The exorcist character archetype in supernatural fiction is typically specialized in getting rid of evil spirits. Do you have any other arguments to dispute that? AHI-3000 (talk) 03:37, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you not understand that we're talking about a broader issue? ^SMason_Garrison 03:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only going to talk about the specific category page which triggered today's incident. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your behavior triggered this incident. ^SMason_Garrison 03:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: and @Zxcvbnm: Can we just get this part over with now? AHI-3000 (talk) 03:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What part over? The part over where you actually engage with the bigger behavioral issue here? ^SMason_Garrison 03:40, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am only going to focus on resolving this petty editing dispute, not some passive aggressive arguments about me specifically. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You'd do well to read WP:BATTLEGROUND. Right now you are displaying such a mentality towards other editors. If you can't understand that we are not here to persecute you, just that you are making it impossible to do our (volunteer) job, then IDK. Its the equivalent of walking up to a hot dog cart, throwing all the buns on the floor and then saying "hey stop insulting me!" when they tell you to stop. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:06, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see it more like two people are blowing a minor petty editing conflict out of proportion. None of us on Wikipedia are getting paid anything to care this much about categorizing a category. Your analogy would be more apt if I were vandalizing this page, which I'm not doing, you just don't agree about the categories. AHI-3000 (talk) 06:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's something not worth caring about, why keep reverting it and insisting you are right? You'd have just said "whoops, my bad" and left it alone. Clearly you care about it enough to even revert Mason's edit an hour later, AFTER this discussion started.

Sorry, but that just seems like a disingenuous attempt to get us to stop. And please don't accuse us of edit warring when you were the one who refused to abide by consensus even after it was decided on. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:18, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you care about this matter much more than I do, considering you went back to revive and escalate this conflict that happened almost a year ago. You're both acting like I crossed some serious line, when all that happened is that you and I don't agree about a few categories on a category page. AHI-3000 (talk) 07:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I should put this in a more "yes/no question" type of way, since you don't seem willing to debate like a typical editor.

Are all exorcists hunters? Do you have proof of this assertion from a WP:RS?

If you have no proof, why exactly should others acquiesce to your changes without pushback? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison: and @Zxcvbnm: Are we going to settle the specific issue about this category? I'm not going to talk about myself. AHI-3000 (talk) 03:51, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you not going to talk about your behavior? Like, so many of these issues would be prevented if you actually followed the basic process of consensus seeking. ^SMason_Garrison 03:54, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to be lectured at as if both of you are just neutral observers or backseat admins when you're just as involved in this dumb dispute as I am. As if you two are not also "edit warring" as well. AHI-3000 (talk) 06:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that so many of these conflicts could be avoided if you followed basic consensus seeking practices. This is a generalized problem with a really really basic solution. ^SMason_Garrison 12:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

When editing, and your edits are challenged, you have 2 options.

Stop, discuss, and only proceed in accordance of the resulting WP:CONSENSUS.
Drop it and move on.

That's it. None of this complaining that it's not worth discussing, and/or continuing to revert despite obviously lacking a consensus to do so.

If you're concerned about being deadlocked by the same editors, there are methods to garner more discussion. Ask related Wikiprojects for input. Starting WP:RFCs. Avenues like WP:DR or WP:3O.

Please start doing this instead of edit warring. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional space units and formations has been nominated for merging

Category:Fictional space units and formations has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional extraterrestrial robots has been nominated for merging

Category:Fictional extraterrestrial robots has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional extraterrestrial cyborgs has been nominated for merging

Category:Fictional extraterrestrial cyborgs has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Demon superheroes has been nominated for merging

Category:Demon superheroes has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Demon supervillains has been nominated for merging

Category:Demon supervillains has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional bandits has been nominated for merging

Category:Fictional bandits has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional robbers has been nominated for merging

Category:Fictional robbers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional female robbers has been nominated for merging

Category:Fictional female robbers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]