Don't have a Bat-Cow, man

[Carrite]

Still spinning...

tim

P.S. You've got a glob of shit in your teeth, check a mirror.

[ericbarbour]

https://genderdesk.wordpress.com/2019/11/06/suckswatch-the-batcow-bet/

But does he grasp the opportunity? No. Unfortunately, lately he just seems intent on bullying people. He calls Carrite a liar. Carrite may be a lot of things, but that is not one of them.

I am forced to agree. He's a nitwit and a twat and a dildoboy, but not a liar.....

[Carrite]

https://genderdesk.wordpress.com/2019/11/06/suckswatch-the-batcow-bet/

But does he grasp the opportunity? No. Unfortunately, lately he just seems intent on bullying people. He calls Carrite a liar. Carrite may be a lot of things, but that is not one of them.

I am forced to agree. He's a nitwit and a twat and a dildoboy, but not a liar.....

You forgot "arrogant dick" and "Wikipedia lover."

Good to see you're stirring from your two-year slumber, keeping this fine forum perking with cutting edge criticism and analysis.

tim

[CrowsNest]

https://genderdesk.wordpress.com/2019/11/06/suckswatch-the-batcow-bet/

But does he grasp the opportunity? No. Unfortunately, lately he just seems intent on bullying people. He calls Carrite a liar. Carrite may be a lot of things, but that is not one of them.

I am forced to agree. He's a nitwit and a twat and a dildoboy, but not a liar.....

As I've already shown three times now, it's right there in black and white.......

this piece was substantial enough that it needs to run through a standardized community deletion process (PROD or AfD) rather than being unilaterally put to the sword........Process is important.

A straight up lie. A self-serving one too. Decieved his own supposed colleagues for personal gain.

[Carrite]

As I've already shown three times now, it's right there in black and white.......

this piece was substantial enough that it needs to run through a standardized community deletion process (PROD or AfD) rather than being unilaterally put to the sword........Process is important.

A straight up lie. A self-serving one too. Decieved his own supposed colleagues for personal gain.

That's absolutely false. You are the one misrepresenting the facts, not I.

I've always been a big defender of AfD ("the one process at Wikipedia that really works well") and an opponent of deletionism in all its forms, including gutting an article of content before dragging it to AfD, sneaking potentially controversial material into the (less supervised) PROD queue, abusing Speedy Deletion.......... and this new shenanigan, silently converting an article that YOU YOURSELF proclaimed "undeletable" into a redirect (de facto deleting it!) without process or debate of any kind.

This sort of behavior is worse than abuse of Speedy, worse than abuse of Prod, and worse than gutting-and-AfDing. It's damned near sanctionable, to my way of thinking, and if this was anything more major than an OBVIOUS delete candidate such as [[Bat-Cow]], it would have been an AN/I report in the making...

However, we're all used to you making preposterous assertions and spinning non-stop, so asking for an apology would be an exercise in futility. Everyone is wise to your game by now.

RfB

[CrowsNest]

Tedious.

Which policy or guideline supports your revert? Since when has unilaterally redirecting an article ever been called "silent" deletion? What could you possibly have said in any AN/I report?

This is just so much horseshit. Laughable that you think it would stand up. You're a billy bullshitter.

[Carrite]

Which policy or guideline supports your revert?

WP:BEBOLD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold

RfB

[CrowsNest]

Which policy or guideline supports your revert?

WP:BEBOLD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold

I can't believe you even said it. Shameless.

[Carrite]

Which policy or guideline supports your revert?

WP:BEBOLD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold

I can't believe you even said it. Shameless.

You asked, dumbass — I answered.

RfB

[CrowsNest]

WP:BEBOLD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold

I can't believe you even said it. Shameless.

You asked, dumbass — I answered.

You answered like a dumbass. Hilarious that you're pretending you didn't.

You might as well have said you didn't have a policy, because of course BEBOLD is merely a green light to do anything you reasonably think will benefit Wikipedia. A potential defence that disappears like the morning mist when people see the full context of what you did and why.

You know fine well all things I have told you are true. There is no such thing as viewing unilateral redirection as a good faith act as somehow sanction worthy "silent" deletion. There is no such thing as an article being substantial enough to warrant a community process prior to unilateral redirection. The very notion is absurd. Antethical to Wikipedia. It is in complete opposition to BEBOLD, as you well know, you dumbass.

You've got jack to justify what you did, but there are plenty of policies that say you deserve to be sanctioned for lying to your fellow contributors, wasting their time, distracting them from more important matters, for no better reason than your selfish greed.

Let you forget, this is about showing people what Wikipedians are really capable of, their true characters.

I wonder what other patent rubbish you'll say to avoid having to admit what you really did, to hide the obvious fact it was completely unjustified, except in terms of your greed and selfishness. The lies, the deceit, the games. In response to legitimate complaints, we get everything but the honest truth. A true Wikipedian.