User talk:Zacharyalejandro

Archives

Archive 1

What is this tirade even supposed to mean? No one is arguing about whether content is true or false. We’re saying that you do not have the option of opting out of discussions or acting without a consensus. That is 100% absolutely not a right you have. Do it again, and your account is blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 03:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A final warning that you are not to be using Gamefaqs as a source, as you seem to be suggesting you’re doing here. There is a long-running consensus that Gamefaqs is not a reliable source, and you do not have the right to opt out of following that consensus. You start a discussion to change the consensus, or you follow it. Those are your two options. Sergecross73 msg me 20:20, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've said this many times, and I seem to act like a broken record here. When sources such as Gamefaqs.com have the same exact release dates as the Nintendo sites or Nintendo Life, Gematsu and the like. They seem to be 100% accurate. Sometimes they have placeholders put in, but according to their boards, their dates CAN be accurate when applicable. I don't what else to explain better here. Wikipedia is user-based. Nintendo Life and Gematsu sources their stuff from Nintendo Everything, Pure Nintendo and such. What is it with you admins? If you want to get rid of me, than do it. But you can't block anyone from viewing pages. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 19:07, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When Wikipedia considers a site unreliable, it doesn't mean they never get anything right or that they lie or fabricate information. Gamefaqs is considered Unreliable by the project due to the fact it relies on user submission (WP:USERG) and past issues with veritibility. This is something you've long known, and nothing more is required from you other than to say, "Sure thing, will use other sites." Us "admins" are trying our best NOT to get rid of you. You've been given dozens of extra chances that other users might have long been permanently blocked for. You've already said many other sites have blocked you from editing because of your behavior, so I really wish you'd understand how much leeway we've given you. -- ferret (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So when sources like Nintendo Life source a game that's scheduled for release, and they originally get the source from like from Nintendo Everything, Pure Nintendo and some other sites that are logically unreliable? Or when Gematsu applies the same sites for further information, how do you guys counteract that? Do you guys do some digging in research to find a reliable solution? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

I'd need to see an example of Gematsu doing it. But personally? I don't like Nintendo Life being considered a reliable source. They are little better that Nintendo Everything and the plethera of other "Nintendo This" and "Nintendo That" fan sites. In theory though, if a site is reliable and they publish something they source from another site, we are expecting that because we trust them, they did their research to verify the information was valid. -- ferret (talk) 21:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is that, if a reliable source cites and unreliable source, the reliable source did their due diligence to confirm it was correct. And you cite the reliable source, not the unreliable one. Or even search for a difference reliable source that doesn’t use the unreliable source. But you absolutely don’t go use the unreliable source. Look, if it’s too much for you to understand, just follow WP:VG/S until you can wrap your head around it. But again, opting out a consensus is not an option. You’ve been editing a long time, and should know better by now. If you blatantly disregard a consensus or purposely use an unreliable source again, your account is blocked indefinitely. Sergecross73 msg me 21:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pawapuro Productions. Since you had some involvement with the Pawapuro Productions redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you blanked your talk page back in March–as per WP:ARCHIVENOTDELETE, please don't do that. I can't say I know what you were doing, but if you really want it off of this page, I recommend you paste your old talk page into a page titled something like User talk:Zacharyalejandro/archive. (I can't restore your old talk because I think it would ping everyone who's already posted there, lol). L ke (talk) 20:42, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know how to archive this. Thanks for the info on how to do it though. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 21:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

L ke - please see WP:OWNTALK. What you linked to doesn’t apply to user pages.

Zachary - You’re not required to archive your own talk page, though many prefer to. It’s up to you. If you want me to archive it, I will. If you don’t, you don’t need to. Just let me know. Sergecross73 msg me 01:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: If you could do that for me, I'd appreciate that. Don't know why I didn't mention this a couple years ago. I just didn't think of it until today. Happy Mother's Day to your family btw. Mine didn't go as planned because of the circumstances surrounding today's world. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 02:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've done this for the messages before April 2020. Archive 1 is 100kb or so which is a typical size to move to Archive 2. Let me know if you have any questions on how to set up the next page, but basically all you do is start it with {{tan}} and then paste in sections you want to archive. -- ferret (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zacharyalejandro

Thank you for creating Captain Tsubasa: Rise of New Champions.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good start!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 01:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zacharyalejandro,

Thank you for creating MotoGP 20.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please add multiple independent, reliable sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Willsome429}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 18:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Games that release on the Japanese Nintendo and PlayStation Stores must include Japanese language support. Not true for Xbox. The Japanese Xbox Store carries many western titles that do not offer Japanese language support. Do you think this should be footnoted on List of Xbox One games? — Niche-gamer 21:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I think they be footnoted in the article itself if linked. As far as I'm concerned though, references such as those that don't have a page available should be listed on the lists like the Xbox One games, if that makes sense. But Xbox Japan website still doesn't work with releases? I don't get that one. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 03:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Please stop adding the October 16 2020 as release date for Dirt 5 List of PlayStation 5 games, there is been no confirmed specific date for the PS5 version of the game. Thank you. Poklane 02:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  -- ferret (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Endorsed. Sergecross73 msg me 15:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainGalaxy is wishing you a Merry Christmas (quite possibly a White Christmas).

Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the Christmas spirit by adding {{subst:User:Matty.007/template/Christmas}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message. If everyone who got this put it on two talk pages, we would have... lots of Christmas spirit! Have fun finding links in this message!

— 15:53, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Zacharyalejandro,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! CaptainGalaxy 00:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

---

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

--Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Zacharyalejandro (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I understand the reasons why I was blocked for my disruptive behavior in ensuing threats towards other moderators/contributors. I believe that my actions were very uncomfortable with others. I'm very sorry for my unlawful yelling in all caps, angering people I wish I'd never did, as well as not adhering to rules regarding list articles. I will instead just go with what you guys want to change. I will keep my thoughts to myself and keep my mouth shut. I will go as far as make weekly contributions instead of daily. I promise anyone that. I'm truly sorry for what I've done the past year. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 04:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Decline reason:

We don't want you to be silent, cave in to others, and reduce your editing if that's not what you want to do; that doesn't address the underlying thinking behind your actions. We want to know how your behavior will change going forward. This is a collaborative project and it may not be possible to just not interact with others. You can adhere to consensus without agreeing with it. Your actions were not "unlawful" as Wikipedia is not a government with laws. I think there is a path to you being unblocked, we just want you to describe how you will better collaborate with others in the future. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Zacharyalejandro (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I will be collaborative to others by making reasonable contributions instead of abusive actions towards others. I will show gratitude by agreeing to anyone else who may have different ideas in regards to improving video game list articles.Zacharyalejandro (talk) 01:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline, only one unblock request at a time please. I'll review the request below in the next 24 hours if someone else doesn't first. Floquenbeam (talk) 21:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Zacharyalejandro (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I understand my reasoning behind the block that my actions were very unnecessary. I swear on my oath that I will not blame others for what they are doing right. I will not harass or bully others to do what they want and instead, just fix mistakes without saying anything that would otherwise upset editors. I have read the entire article on the site guidelines and I would like to have another chance. There are a few mistakes that are minor that I would like to politely fix. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 03:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Accept reason:

see comments in #Unblocked (last one) below. Floquenbeam (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so reviewing your talk page and some of your old contribs, it seems like you've frequently been rude to people in the past, and refused to go along with established guidelines on video game list articles. I'm reasonably comfortable that this unblock request is an agreement to stop being rude. Like, seriously, not going to happen anymore. (Right?!) I'm less clear on what the guideline-related problems were, and less clear that you're agreeing you won't violate those anymore in this request. If @Ferret: or @Sergecross73: could point me to a noticeboard or talk page or other place where I can get up to speed on what happened, and if you (Zachary) can go into more detail on what went wrong, guideline-wise, and what you're going to do instead, we might be able to move forward.

In particular, Ferret and Sergecross73, any suggestions beyond a convincing agreement to knock it off? Like topic bans, revert limits, etc.? --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: Zachary's issues revolve around getting incivil and refusing to follow consensus. Much of this is in the archives of Talk:List of Nintendo Switch games (A–F) but is scattered across other such lists as well, which is his primary interest in maintaining. His final block came about from Special:Diff/979494168 and Special:Diff/979493019. The general theme is fairly robotic but positive list maintenance, which eventually hits some frustration such as a list using a date format he doesn't like, or someone inserting a game without sourcing, or (as in the last incident), someone suggesting the game's official name be used instead of the abbreviated names Zachary preferred. In most cases these incidents would result in talk page discussion and Zachary would either agree with consensus (or at least grumblingly accept it wasn't going to be the way he wanted), or, flat out say he doesn't care and repeat the edits. The latter is when most blocks have been applied.

Whether any limits or topic bans would be useful, I think it's one of those cases where a TBAN from video game lists is, effectively, maintaining the indef block, as that's what he wants to edit. The very short of it is, I'm not opposed to giving him another shot. His absence from the lists has had the consequence of allowing some other editors to get involved in them, as he was fairly overwhelming in his speed of adding entries to them. There's more potential for him to show he can work well with others, beyond just the normal WP:VG regulars who monitor lists. -- ferret (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not particularly convinced. We've gone through the cycle so many times and he's been given so much rope. He'll add to the list constructively for a while, and then it'll devolve when he threatens to randomly stop following policy/guidelines/consensus he doesn't like, or randomly start making threats. He, for some reason, has disclosed that he's been banned from (multiple?) other Wiki/wikia type projects too, so it's not a "Wikipedia" thing either. I won't stand in the way if someone wants to give him another shot, but I also won't endorse it, nor can I imagine a scenario where he's still editing by the end of the year. He'll have another outburst and bring another block upon himself again. Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I'll wait for a reply from Zachary, but that is helpful. Zachary, you should address these specific concerns when you respond. I guess I'm looking for more detail than "I was wrong and won't do it again". This would almost certainly be your last chance, so I want to try to ensure it isn't guaranteed to fail. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:17, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ferret brings up what happened actually. What I fully understand is that other editors in my absence, have maintained the lists, more specifically the Switch list, however, there are some hiccups to those missing, I would like to fix without being a danger to others, especially when it is concerning to the admins, like Serge and Ferret. I totally understand if this is my last chance. I'd like to give this my last shot if possible. I will pay attention to what I say either on the lists, or elsewhere. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 16:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zachary, let's look at something very specific. Recently a consensus was reached to set an inclusion criteria for the list of Nintendo Switch games. That inclusion criteria can be read at Talk:List of Nintendo Switch games (A–F). Are you willing to follow this? -- ferret (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have read that and what I don't get though, is the number of additional games being added by others not involved by me, a heap of games are added by anonymous users, and if the following of the points of those mentioned in that criteria, they look like they are ignored as some games on the Switch list have little to no source to back up. Games that are being added, those people seem to be adding them from Nintendo's official websites. I would follow it, but I'd like to wait before adding at least a game, because it looks to me, others aren't too keen on that. Zacharyalejandro (talk)

Yes, the discussion is very recent and I don't think anyone has reached out to that particular IP user yet. It's not really been enforced just yet, and there's some cleanup to be done. -- ferret (talk) 18:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably start by adding some links to pages that have a page already and merging the references to the respective pages if a reference isn't specified for that particular console. I've looked and there are some that would possibly need linking, if you guys are okay with me doing so. If not, I'll wait a little longer on doing some fixings if preferred. However,

though I'll leave the IP users to you guys from now on, as I'm concerned about saying something in a snarky tone like I did numerous times in the past, and that is probably also what led to my actions that got me blocked, not just the changes in the lists. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 06:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also understand perfectly that this may very well be my last chance to edit on Wikipedia. So if I can come back to editing, I solemnly swear on my oath that I will not harass or blame others for doing their job here. I care about editing as much as anyone here, some of also appreciate it, and I'm glad to be a part of the family. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 22:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Floquenbeam: I have no additional inquiries. As you can see in his responses, Zachary shows a concern for what "others are getting away with", but as long as he keeps his cool and understands that it's sometimes difficult to communicate to IP users, it seems he has no issue with recent consensuses. Zachary: The key is to not get riled up over it. The IPs (or even named accounts) may never even see edit notices, inclusion criterias, talk page warnings, edit summaries in reverts, etc. Keep cool, simply revert where needed with explanation. -- ferret (talk) 12:28, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, User:Ferret, I think that was a productive talk. Zach, I've unblocked you, based on your assurances that you're going to turn over a new leaf. That means, in particular, no personal attacks, name calling, harassment, or bullying of others (or anything resembling that), and respecting consensus decisions, guidelines, and policies even if you do not agree with them. Follow Ferret's advice and I think you'll do fine. Don't follow it, and I fear the next block will be a throw-away-the-key type. As you know, you've got a lot of eyes on you now. If anything is unclear, or you're not sure where the boundaries are, please ask first. Good luck. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. I do have one issue, that User:Ferret might help me with, did you guys get rid of the copy and paste mechanic? Typing on a list is a lot harder now that I think lists are getting bigger now and when I was updating it, it seems as though the page runs super slow on my phone now. Is this happening to any of your guy's phones/computers at all or is it just me? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 23:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The list is on the large size right now, close to requiring another split. Visual Editor on a Phone is likely getting a tad slow. I personally edit on a PC in source editor mode though. -- ferret (talk) 12:22, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I honestly thought that it's been awhile, things have changed since, like the 'Permanent' key beside the 'Watch this page'. So I also thought that maybe you guys changed to remove the copy and paste feature altogether, I don't really think typing everything by hand is my thing, but if it makes things slower, copy and pasting is usually my go-to when editing, although I do look for exact info to make sure it's not from an unreliable source. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know copy and paste should work fine, but I don't edit from a phone. -- ferret (talk) 15:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. When I tried to do that, it deletes it when I highlight it, which is weird to me, but I'll just keep going instead. But thanks. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 18:44, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I still have that problem, could you see if you can find anyone who possibly uses a phone to try and edit and see if it's just my phone that does it, please? It sorta annoying that I somehow can't get the copy and paste to work. Every time I try to highlight something and paste something, it just deletes the entire highlighted part. It could just be a page limit thing or something, cause on here, it works just fine. Thank you! Zacharyalejandro (talk) 05:03, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's only not happening on that list alone, as other lists have been doing that as well. Apparently I'm only allowed to write by hand I guess, which is weird, or it might be a Sprint carrier thing, because ever since T-Mobile merged, me and my family personally have been having problems. Do you guys know where I'm going with this particular issue I'm having? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 14:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Sorry, I simply don't edit on Mobile, either with mobile web view or with the app. You might try asking at the Helpdesk if anyone knows what's going on. Or try switching to "Desktop view" in your browser. -- ferret (talk) 17:40, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. I tried explaining as best as I can. I will ask around. Thanks! Zacharyalejandro (talk) 17:51, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

GameSpot is a fine/strong source. I don't see a need to switch it to Nintendo Life in this case. Usually editors leave an edit summary to explain their logic. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 02:14, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would think if a citation would have that listed twice, we would not put the GS thing but instead have the references listed with <ref name> stuff that would make more sense here. If you want to take a look at the List of Switch games, it would seem much simpler to put it that way, but instead of going like this again, @Sergecross73:, or @Ferret:, would you guys like to add anything else? I know just using just two letter symbols like what he mentioned, is that okay? I know I also didn't say anything in the summary, and I apologize. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 03:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

Zachary, I'm not sure I follow what you mean about listing a citation twice. There was no reason to replace the GameSpot citation with NintendoLife, which is certainly a lesser quality source. The referencing format that Czar uses is perfectly acceptable. There are several ways of doing references, and Czar uses a particular style that centralizes the references together in one place then refers to them by a name. It's actually my preferred style, but there are guidelines that direct us not to change the established style of an article, so the way you are used to is more commonly encountered. That goes both ways. Since Czar has established that style for Disc Room, it should be maintained. If you have any questions on how to use that style, I'm sure we can explain. -- ferret (talk) 12:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a moment, I actually was trying to transport the source from the List to the article on the topic. But that source with the review, should be under the Reception. There are probably some things that have changed with in regards to sources, are there, @Ferret:? I thought if the same source is repeated twice, then we would condense it with the ref name tag. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 16:59, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where Czar uses {{r|GS}}, that's a way of doing ref name tags. It's a template with the same functionality. The references are defined in the References section, and referenced in the article with {{r}}. -- ferret (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I never heard about this one before. Thanks for clearing this up. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

i edited the PS5 page because while i was reading it, i was a bit confused that it may have contained PS4 games, if you could maybe sometime take a look at this and tell me what you think, and if i made the right call here, thankyou friend! EzeeWiki (talk) 06:47, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me about this. However, I'm a bit confused by what you meant by that versus by what you instated, and was hoping we could have more eyes on this particular topic. Hey @Ferret:, could you see if what he stated was the right call to make? I don't think I know the actual answer to this problem, and I thought you might help with this? Thanks! Zacharyalejandro (talk) 07:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reworded it to be exact and encyclopedicly written. -- ferret (talk) 11:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still having this problem? One solution I have seen suggested is to switch to desktop view, because mobile view has some problems that desktop view does not. Also, you might try asking at WP:VPT.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not having any issues with this. However I do switch to desktop view when editing. I still edit on my Android phone but the page still does it sometimes. I've just learn to deal with it. Thanks for asking. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 23:32, 14 July 2021 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro[reply]

After I posted I saw the section above but got distracted and forgot to mention that I saw you had gotten help. Anyway, I'm way behind in the Help Desk archives and when I see a situation where I could have helped, I will sometimes respond.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Please immediately stop removing DATEVAR and ENGVAR templates. If you don't, I'll block you indefinitely again. This is an area you had past issues with and you should not be messing with standard MOS templates. The templates indicate to editors the proper date format to use, and some other templates automatically detect it's presence and format their dates automatically based on it. Stop. -- ferret (talk) 17:50, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You honestly don’t care about users anymore it seems like? If you really wanna just perma ban me, then I honestly won’t force you to do that. Sick and tired of people treating users like crap anyways *sigh* Zacharyalejandro (talk) 05:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're the one editing against guidelines you've been previously informed of. It's disruptive to the project to go around mass removing maintenance templates. That's not treating you like crap, it's stopping your disruptive behavior. You can choose to go "My bad, I shouldn't have done that." or whine that you were "mistreated" when you weren't. Past experience has shown that you only respond to clear warnings. Even so, my warning is perfectly polite and explains exactly why the behavior was a problem. -- ferret (talk) 14:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I see you're an avid editor in the "List of X games" genre, specifically adding release dates. A lot of the games don't have sources to back them up, so here's an easy way of finding them (if you don't know this already); I'm gonna use Paper Mario: The Origami King as an example.

• For North American release dates you can use IGN; search up the game's name followed by IGN and you should see a review article, some other tidbits, and an overview site, in this case, "Paper Mario: The Origami King - IGN": [1]. Bam, they have the game's release date.
• For European release dates (if the release date there is different), do the same thing but, "Paper Mario: The Origami King • Eurogamer.net": [2]. Bam, Europe release date with a source. The Origami King was released worldwide on the same date, but these three main locations normally have different dates.
• Japanese release dates have a couple of extra steps. Go to google translate (English to Japanese), and paste the name of the game in there. The Origami King is ペーパーマリオオリガミキング. You'll be left with what it's referred to in Japan; Paper Mario: The Origami King becomes Paper Mario Origami King if you translate it back to English. Most of the time at the beginning of a Nintendo video game article there's a hatnote next to the game's title for the game's name in Japanese, so if that's already there you can copy that. Now, go to the Japanese website Famitsu; in the top right corner there's a search bar, so click on that. It should expand the search bar and show you a list of 20 games. From there look to the left and it should say "article" (if you used Google Translate to translate the site), and switch it to "game" instead. Paste the Japanese title into the search bar and the game overview site should show up. Click on it [3] and bam, to the right is the Japanese release date.

When citing a release date, use the cite web template and plop in the overview page's URL. For the title, I normally do "[Name of the game] - [Name of the website]". Hope this guide helps you in finding release date sources! Panini!^🥪 18:27, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Is there a list of release dates for games that are released in North America and Europe that we can cite together using a footnote or something instead of cluttering the list with a bunch of different references with the same information on release dates? With Japan however, I use Nintendo Japan’s website for those. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 18:42, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Japan does work, but using an unrelated website helps prove secondary notability better, which is why I choose to use Famitsu. By citing together, I believe you're referring to bundling citations, which you can do using this template (you can view how works in edit mode):

^[1]

Panini!^🥪 19:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Part of your unblock agreement was that you would keep a good attitude and be civil to people, but I keep seeing instances where you keep griping about having to follow policies or consensus formed. It's getting old. You know what Wikipedia is. Following these things are a non-negotiable part of Wikipedia, so randomly complaining about it isn't going to get you anywhere.

You're wasting too much of peoples time with your idle complaining. Here's your options.

1. Follow policies, guidelines, and consensus as they are now.
2. Start up large-scale discussions to find new consensus to your liking.
3. Stop editing.

Please think hard about your future here at Wikipedia. You're already on your last chance. Sergecross73 msg me 18:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[4][5] -- kindly knock it off. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:22, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pondering whether or not to reinstate Zachary's indef block. @Sergecross73 and Floquenbeam: for thoughts. The above edit summary example is more or less a breach of their unblock promises, plus Serge warned them in October. -- ferret (talk) 01:38, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is baffling all around. I'm not aware of any major authorities that are, without any sort of context or qualifiers, referring to the pandemic in the past-tense like that. He's advanced no sort of coherent argument backing his stance, just a completely unfounded rage response that totally goes against his unblock conditions. And in a content area he knows nothing about and has no experience in. Just absolutely terrible judgement all around. I was already concerned by his October edits. This is way worse. Sergecross73 msg me 01:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where can we get law enforcement for your blatant violation of free speech??? Hello??? You guys and your Wikipedia rules! Laughable and intolerable! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacharyalejandro (talk • contribs) 02:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn what the right to free speech actually means before trying to cite it as a defense. Beyond the easily proven fact that you have no legal right to edit Wikipedia per WP:FREE, you didn't follow virtually any rules of Wikipedia. You didn't provide a source. You didn't discuss on the talk page. You didn't even follow through on your own unblock condition promise to act calmly and with civility. It's ridiculous that any long-term editor would act like this, let alone one on a last chance. Sergecross73 msg me 04:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Fuzheado | Talk 02:53, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Block reason copied here: Disruptive editing - reinstating indefinite block. Violating agreed-upon behavior conditions, adding defiant statement to user page, and changing lead sentence in high profile COVID-19 article against established consensus while leaving inappropriate edit summary. Special:Diff/1054602150) -- Fuzheado | Talk 02:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notification of users/admins involved with previous blocks or requests - @Ferret, Sergecross73, Floquenbeam, 331dot, Deepfriedokra, and MartinezMD: -- Fuzheado | Talk 02:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to free speech?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacharyalejandro (talk • contribs) 03:05, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Free speech -- ferret (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Block endorsed. To anyone who may see this down the line - please discuss this editors long history on Wikipedia with me before considering an unblock request. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 04:24, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse block. Anyone saying they have the right to edit as they please on a collaborative project (after saying they will not edit against consensus) is WP:NOTCOMPATIBLE with a collaborative project that uses consensus to settle disputes among editors, and which uses WP:reliable sources to build content. (Zacharyalejandro ‎not even offering an unreliable source for the COVID19 edit is beyond the Pale, especially in an area as fraught as this.) Zacharyalejandro's attitude in July of this year was a harbinger of trouble to come. A total lack of understanding that he must edit in a collaborative manner-- and refusal to do so. In "Final warning COVID-19 pandemic edits" above, it becomes plain that they do not wish to be held to the same rules as everyone else-- that they chafe against these rules. And reading through the (protracted) unblock discussion, I never see them actually address the reasons for their block in a meaningful way. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse block. It's too bad they decided to blow the chance they had to be a productive, collaborative contributor. They seem to either be incapable or unwilling to do so. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Replying to ping. No objection to block. Note that the last unblock was described by the unblocking admin (me) as a last chance, so I'd object to anyone unblocking, particularly in the next year. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:13, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reading this user talk page, I am disappointed. You had the chance to be constructive, but instead, you blew it even after you appealed an indefinite ban. Pyraminxsolver (talk) 04:52, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice, this user has been evading their block. This is checkuser confirmed, and I've updated the block to reflect that. -- ferret (talk) 00:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you admins please mind your own damn business!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100a:b0d2:d51c:6c0f:41d4:cded:e790 (talk) 05:37, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As info, I've blocked two of Zachary's IP ranges again today, as he's still evading. Zachary: You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia any longer. -- ferret (talk) 23:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is NOT your God-given right to make! Or anyone's else's! Period! Do I make myself clear!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100A:B01E:9E7E:111A:86D3:A420:3088 (talk) 07:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Funny story, but you're wrong. Re-blocked. -- ferret (talk) 12:39, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further block evasion in Oct/Nov 2022. -- ferret (talk) 04:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Drancia Saga has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Redirect makes no sense GooseTheGreat (talk) 12:50, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Drancia Saga and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 19#Drancia Saga until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 05:33, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]