User talk:BMWF

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome to my talk page!

  • Please use the Reply button to reply to a message, or add topic (+) to start a new section.
  • If I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here, instead, reply there.
    • Mention me using the "Mention a user" button in the Reply box or type out {{ping|BMWF}}.
    • I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
  • If you prefer to manually edit the page to post:
    • Use an accurate and appropriate heading.
    • Indent your comment by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
    • Sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

[edit]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding the article's prose. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Dragon Age: The Veilguard".The discussion is about the topic Dragon Age: The Veilguard.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The noticeboard discussion was opened by a moderator but requires a response from editors agreeing to participate. While it took a bit for the discussion to start, I'm hopeful we can quickly hammer out the issues. Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sariel Xilo Hey Sariel, DRN exists to moderate discussion between existing participants of a given discussion. An example would be where there is discussion, but for whatever reasons that discussion is too unwieldy, disorganized, and/or forking off topic, etc. DRN can then be used as a forum for an organized discussion, but I don't think we've had that issue. DRN isn't intended create new consensus or change an existing consensus unless the participants themselves change their opinions.
If you want more input in the talk page discussions you could maybe post it on related spaces. You could also put it through RfC, but I think that might be premature given that the discussion doesn't have many participants yet. BMWF (talk) 02:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DRN can be used for content disputes & concerns over interpretation of policy. If it was the incorrect venue, a moderator would have flagged it and suggested moving to another noticeboard. Instead a discussion occurred at that venue & a consensus was developed; you had multiple opportunities to participate while the discussion moved on without you.
WP:NOTUNANIMITY states "Editors should make a good faith effort to reach a consensus. That means that the dissenting party has to state how the current proposal fails to meet the interests of the wider group, rather than merely stating they will not accept it. But after a good faith discussion, sometimes the dissenting party must consent to move forward even if they disagree with the specific course of action." Constantly reverting even after other editors have reached consensus & insisting there's no consensus because you alone disagree is edit warring behavior. Please see Talk:Dragon Age: The Veilguard#DRN followup to continue this discussion. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is an inaccurate interpretation of the purpose of DRN. DRN can be used to facilitate moderated discussion of content disputes, but it is not a tool in itself for changing consensus in itself. Consensus can only be changed or modified if the involved parties themselves change their views.
The talk page discussion did not suffer from the issues where DRN was necessary. If you want broader input, which is something where consensus can change, then there are the other avenues I mentioned. BMWF (talk) 19:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sariel Xilo: Can we please continue discussion of the above so we can work towards reaching a settlement? What's the best step you think should be taken as BMWF clearly doesn't agree to DRN? Wikibenboy94 (talk) 14:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikibenboy94: DRN recommended an RfC next as less painful than ANI but I'm fine with either an RfC or going to the edit war noticeboard if you want to take the lead. I should have more desktop access to Wikipedia this week but I'm still traveling so ping me & I'll try to have a timely response. Sariel Xilo (talk) 14:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation/opinion required at the edit warring noticeboard

[edit]

Hello BMWF, please provide a statement at [1]. Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

[edit]

Hi again, I didn't know Forsaken had queer characters, and I see now why your passionate about the topic. If some of my past edits or comments seemed insensitive to you, that was absolutely not my intention. I hope we can put our past differences behind us and edit collaboratively in the future. Of course I will respect my topic ban though and won't edit any gensex-related topics in the future. Happy editing! FMSky (talk) 00:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello BMWF. I noticed that you referred to me using male pronouns in a recent discussion. I just wanted to let you know that I do not use those pronouns on Wikipedia. I prefer to be referred to by my username or with they/them/their pronouns (which I mentioned to you before at the Administrators Noticeboard). In the future, please be careful not to assume the gender of other users. Thanks, Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate Wikiproject comments

[edit]

If you wish to contribute to the WP:VG discussions themselves, please do, but I need you to stop with the bad faith accusations and the attempts at adding a chilling effect to the discussions. Do not attempt to police the discussions further. People are merely brainstorming about handling a discussion. They are objectively allowed to do so. There's no misconduct or misuse there. If you derail the discussion any further, you'll be temporarily blocked from editing. Cut it out. Sergecross73 msg me 01:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial topic: Dragon Age: The Veilguard

[edit]

BMWF, please stop. You don't have consensus to make this change on the page, which was fully protected in part due to a dispute you were involved in. Multiple editors have said this is the last stable version.

  • You are going to end up blocked in the near future if you keep fighting over this page.
  • Your WT:VG posts are clear evidence of WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour.
  • You did not participate in the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard about this article.

The sad part of this is that I like the changes your above edit makes. It doesn't matter. Please do not choose to senselessly die on this hill. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]