User talk:Wx50

Lydia Corbett is still alive, she's 88 years old, and you want to harm her Wikipedia page so next time she looks at it it's not as good as can be and filled with cite needed tags threatening removal of her information. I'm 73, seem you get off on elder abuse, huh? Nothing more to say to you tonight so don't bother answering. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn: dude why did you make a fuss at those Chicago pages (let alone with an obvious COI involved), tag team with that other editor in such a way that got hours of my hard-researched well-sourced work removed, and then to put the icing on the cake, the admin who blocked Ghostbeach then went around and mass-reverted dozens of unrelated contributions. I lost about 100 total edits because of you setting into motion such a fiasco. This isn’t even fair anymore, and unfortunately reverting you en masse is the only way I can make a statement nowadays (and probably the only way you can truly understand how I feel each time my account gets blocked, and then have dozens or hundreds of unequivocally good edits mass-reverted) because you’re the only one who actually cares. I’m actually trying to work with you on some of that Chicago stuff and implement your knowledge and experience to grow and improve those pages. Wx50 (talk) 06:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2 a.m. here, I'm finished for today, but have to mention that I set nothing in motion, don't put that on me. Your Chicago edits were reverted because someone noticed you had reverted my removal and put them back. I told you I don't read or edit Chicago politics pages, and after I told you that, and explained how wrong your edits were, I assumed you had taken out the undue stuff, and then was surprised as Biden-finding-the-documents that you had left that vandal-level edit in the lead of History of Chicago. You then threatened me with your "Final warning" if I tried removing it or the other Chicago edits ever again, and apparently forget that you'd asked me to take it up at the talk pages if I wanted them removed. Would have worked out fine if Ghostbeach hadn't reverted (I was hoping Ghostbeach would make it). As I've explained, I don't edit Chicago pages (except tonight, added good data about the Chicago Picasso in a caption), and will not become involved in Chicago pages. When I moved to Madison in 1990 I left Chicago and its brand of politics behind. No, I'm not a "Chicago politician", the entire time I was active I didn't once lie, deal my integrity for favors, or do the other things you can imagine many politicians do daily. Not my style, and not the way I go through life, and getting out of Chicago politics, after doing what I guess I was there to do, felt very nice. I saw tonight's mass punishment edits doing a good deal of harm to Wikipedia navboxes and articles, and have to leave them in hopes that you revert. If you ever began to accept that you are a Wikipedian, and a brother to even your detractors here, and finally start your six-to-eight-month WikiRehab, I'll defend and stand with you when you return. But for now, with your anti-Wikipedian MrBeastModeAllDay attitude, all I can do is try to protect and enhance pages like Lydia Corbett's, who is an artistic legend and still a top-level muse. Randy Kryn (talk) 07:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Someone found several of your accounts at once, same IP? It seems one way for you to have a long-term functioning sock account is to not contact or mention me, as well as not combat other editors, move pages, create multi-socks at once, etc. On the other hand, why not take the six-month period that admins have discussed with you and do some work at simple and the sister-projects in a cooperative way, or maybe just take some of that time off and kick the Wikipedia habit. If you do well you'll likely return, especially if some admins are in your corner and you've done well elsewhere. I will strongly lobby for that, we need you free and ready to edit at the hundreds of founding articles, although you may then mess it up on the first day unless you truly learn the skills you need. I know sister projects sounds like the minor leagues to some, but the minors are where skills are honed. Since you consistently get caught up in a cycle of good edits mixed in with reverts and other things, fighting other editors, or like that lead Chicago history thing, you've got the writing and research expertise but mixed with some pretty bad habits. I still don't understand why you got angry at me about the Chicago history page, did you really think saying that an unknown guy shaped Chicago politics in the 1980s would stay in the lead once someone with common sense saw it, and then checked your account (but then again, it did stay for 10 days, just like that obviously incorrect edit in the Niece and nephew lead stayed for years). I'll eventually go over some of your now-deleted edits to see what good ones can be salvaged, like John Robbins' EarthSave being in his lead, etc. Every time you are found, good edits are lost, but I guess that's the policy here. This gets long, I do more wall of texts than you do now. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]