This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organize and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.Wikipedia essaysWikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysTemplate:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays
Your desire to create one infinitely long article, which you've expressed in your essay here, and you enact via a bias towards merging articles (unilaterally at times) - doesn't cohere with the expansion and cataloguing of human conceptions, events, things and ideas, which encyclopedia's are designed for. Your conduct when you attempt to force your views into reality, also doesn't align with Wikipedia's ethics of consensus and community building. Ergo, I don't believe you're here for the right reason, which should be to BUILD an encyclopedia, not to tear it down through the subversive removal of individual bricks, turning them into pebbles, and placing them on "parent articles" as you put it. Wikipedia is supposed to be expanded, not contracted. 220.235.229.181 (talk) 02:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I only discuss anything with you when you've made an editorial change I disagree with. I included my criticism on your user talk page so that if you do any other unreasonable mergers I'll be able to say that I did raise the issue with you. Other than that, I'm really just not interested in you, and I don't actually come to Wikipedia often enough to be hounding you. I'm sorry that you've always had a problem with me, it's very unfortunately, but it's okay to not get along with people - I won't try to convince you I'm a good person or worth persistent interaction with.
Please remember that you don't like me 'hounding' you next time you considered merging a page out of existence and - please ask yourself, if the community has reversed the two merger attempts you've tried so far, what does that say about how you conduct yourself in this community space? If you're doing things, that when others find out about them, they go "Oh, I don't think this is actually what we all want" - what does that say about your actions in relation to consensus building? You only need to look at the previous attempt at merging Cultural Bolshevism to see how actively involved the editorial community was in it.
To put it a kinder way, remember that whether you agree or not, Wikipedia is intended to be a consensus based project. The only power anyone has here comes from that fact. Please respect other participants who inhabit the project that I must admit, you do put a lot of work into. Again, sorry if our interactions only come up when that work is being criticized - but that's just the way the cookie crumbles unfortunately. I'm not here to be liked, I'm here to do my own work here. We simply have different roles. 194.223.44.220 (talk) 02:45, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
