User talk:Football2025
Consensus ?
[edit]There was no consensus for change to 2025 FIFA Club World Cup previously. This requires RfC process and seek (and hopefully obtain) a new consensus. You cannot only look at parts of the old discussion and describe the consensus as different to what it originally was, just to suit your view. Matilda Maniac (talk) 05:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, consensus. Are you opposed to the change, even though all the evidence supports it being the 1st edition? I didn’t see any arguments against it in the discussion. Based on the arguments I previously presented, I went ahead and made the changes. I wasn't aware that an RfC process was required, especially given the lack of objections. Just to clarify, I don't edit Wikipedia to promote a personal view—I edit to correct articles and ensure they reflect reality. Football2025 (talk) 18:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
- I am "opposed" to new editors not following the right process for change, assuming that WP:BOLD and WP:NORULES are the only tools that apply. My own opinion on the change does not matter. Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
- I'm opposed to any editors—new or experienced—who don't follow the proper process for making changes. We have WP:BOLD and WP:NORULES for a reason. What's the point of encouraging editors to "fix it yourself instead of just talking about it," or saying "if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it", if we’re not actually allowed to follow those principles? Football2025 (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
- I can break any and every rule I like using WP:NORULES, including ignoring a consensus. Better things to do than debate shades of red with a blind man.Matilda Maniac (talk) 09:05, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
- Do you have difficulty interpreting text? I explained that we had consensus, but someone claimed there wasn't—yet still, no one actually opposed the change. So, if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it. That's the case here. No, this doesn't mean you can break any and every rule—only those that truly prevent you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia. Otherwise, you can't. No point arguing music theory with a deaf composer. Football2025 (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
- I can break any and every rule I like using WP:NORULES, including ignoring a consensus. Better things to do than debate shades of red with a blind man.Matilda Maniac (talk) 09:05, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
- I'm opposed to any editors—new or experienced—who don't follow the proper process for making changes. We have WP:BOLD and WP:NORULES for a reason. What's the point of encouraging editors to "fix it yourself instead of just talking about it," or saying "if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it", if we’re not actually allowed to follow those principles? Football2025 (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
- I am "opposed" to new editors not following the right process for change, assuming that WP:BOLD and WP:NORULES are the only tools that apply. My own opinion on the change does not matter. Matilda Maniac (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2025 (UTC)