User talk:FaviFake

NatGertler has asked you to stop editing their talkpage. Stop pestering them right now or you will be blocked. Bishonen | tålk 18:23, 25 March 2026 (UTC).

Wait, let me get this straight. NatGertler signed my RfC brief statement without my permission, which constitutes "editing others' comments" per WP:TPO, so I contacted them and included a link to the diff. They then rejected the idea that they had edited my comment, so I replied by quoting WP:RFC and linking to the 2024 RfC that allowed editors to leave RfC statements unsigned. They then replied by calling my notice inappropriate and again rejected the idea that they had edited my comment. So I pointed them to the section in WP:TPO where Signature cleanup is considered "editing" a comment, and in response they implied that I had created this rule specifically for that discussion. Therefore, I explained that I had added the reference to the RFC page in order to help people avoid making errors like [theirs], and they reverted my edit, so I gave up. They've yet to acknowledge their apparent mistake, if viewed through WP:AGF. So, which one of these things would get me blocked, exactly? FaviFake (talk) 19:47, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

(watching) Not speaking for Bishonen, but at a guess, the answer is probably: editing to NatGertler's page at 18:14, having been requested not to post there again at 18:02; "In any case, you are banned from this talk page" seems pretty unambiguous. Cheers, —Serial Number 54129 ^{(wake up Fortuna)} 20:11, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

First time ever hearing of a "personal talk page ban", I didn't think it was meant in such a literal sense, especially when said so nonchalantly ... but sure. I still don't see how it could be considered pestering, given that I've only ever tried, and apparently failed, to calmly get them to understand what they got wrong; and I definitely don't think that that comment alone should result in such an strong and final-sounding warning. FaviFake (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Pestering and wikilawyering. Just leave NG alone. Bishonen | tålk 20:47, 25 March 2026 (UTC).

... What?

Editors who "wikilawyer" apply a portion of a policy or guideline with the motive to achieve an objective that goes against the intended message of that policy [...]. They abide by the letter of a policy or guideline while violating its spirit or underlying principles.

How is any of this related to my conversation with them? The intended message of the RFC page which allows editors to leave comments unsigned is incredibly straightforward. Which policy's spirit did i supposedly violate? FaviFake (talk) 21:07, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Re. "personal talk page ban", see WP:NOBAN: If an editor asks you not to edit their user pages, such requests should, within reason, be respected. While only a guideline, it's well-established convention and practice. And, just a "IMHO": I think the "Wikilawyering" refers to what you're doing now, not what you were doing with to Gertler. HTH! Cheers, —Serial Number 54129 ^{(wake up Fortuna)} 21:15, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

The very next sentence says:

However, editors should not make such requests lightly, especially concerning their talk pages, as doing so can impede the ordinary communication which is important for the improvement and smooth running of the project.

... which links to this paragraph:

Some editors routinely tell other editors with whom they disagree to "Stay off my talk page." [...] Talk pages are the fundamental medium used for editors to interact. Except in specific and clear cases of WP:WIKIHOUNDING, such "banning" is highly problematic and an indication that the banning editor is having serious problems cooperating with others.

Regarding the assertion that the "Wikilawyering" refers to what you're doing now, not what you were doing with to Gertler., my question still stands. Where, in this discussion we're having, have I been applying a [...] guideline with the motive to achieve an objective that goes against the intended message of that policy, or violated the spirit or underlying principles of a policy? FaviFake (talk) 15:43, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

More information Views/Day, Quality ...

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
256		Port Vila (talk)	Expand
36		Priority signs (talk)	Stub
18		Road signs in Georgia (talk)	Stub
30		Santarcangelo di Romagna (talk)	Stub
24		Diffusion of Innovations (talk)	Stub
6		Fekete–Szegő inequality (talk)	Stub
41		Road signs in Mongolia (talk)	Stub

Close

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we discuss the first early edits on Abstract Wikipedia, we share the status of Composition Language v2, and we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 16:48, 26 March 2026 (UTC)