It's time for another edition of that popular game, 'Wait, Which User Is The Admin?'.
The following occurs after an IP user tried to PROD the article on the Southern Ocean. Not a smart idea, but the logic was sound, since the article cannot really claim to be about a recognised thing, when most of the introduction explains how people don't consider it a thing, or can't agree on what it is, if it is a thing.
As is his way, apparently never ever learning his lesson from all the other times he makes this mistake, Drmies chose to respond to this with a highly inappropriate templated warning message for the user....
August 2018
Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Southern Ocean. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:31, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
I have to quote the whole exchange that followed, on the article talk page, because it is fucking awful from top bottom, as usual from Professor Fuckstick.
False accusations of vandalism by User Drmies
ATTN Drmies: My edit was not "Vandalism" it is a serious proposal. There is no such ocean as the Southern ocean, even the article itself admits that no authoritative body officially recognizes it. An ocean cannot be surrounded by water and be considered a seperate ocean. Please refrain from making unwarranted and irresponsible accusations of "vandalism". i would have replied on your talk page but apparently you protect it from comments, shutting down discussion of heavy handed tactics and accusations on your part. If you don't agree with my proposal, give a real reason, don't just falsely cry "vandalism". I am no vandal and I am offended. 73.61.8.68 (talk) 00:45, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Aw boohoo. I sorry. And sorry for the talk page too--Nazi trolls, you know. Anyway, I'm no big fan of the CIA, but this seems to be a frequently accepted source on Wikipedia. So yeah, your opinion doesn't hold much water. Drmies (talk) 00:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
There is no need to be flippant and disrespectful. I guess the Nazis must have had a time machine to be trolling you from last century. Judging from other comments on this very talk page, my "opinion" is far from unusual, it's hardly controversial to dispute the existence of a newly minted "ocean" that is physically impossible. You may not agree, but to pretend my position is somehow trolling or outrageous is disingenuous 73.61.8.68 (talk) 00:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey, if you can't take the heat, get out of the cooking room. You spout bullshit about my supposedly "shutting down discussion", I'll call you out for unsubstantiated whining. Tell you what, nominate it via WP:AFD and I promise I'll stay out of it, I'll just watch from the sidelines. Drmies (talk) 01:16, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
it isn't unsubstantiated whining to object to being labeled as a vandal or a troll by someone too lazy or arrogant to deign to actually debate legitimately. Since i am an IP user, your labeling me as a vandal, had i not responded like this, would have tainted my reputation. character assassination basically. on wikipedia we aren't supposed to "take the heat", its meant to be a civil website. 73.61.8.68 (talk) 01:25, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Also, read your own links before you assume they support your position. here is a quote from your "source" " It should be noted that inclusion of the Southern Ocean does not imply recognition of this feature as one of the world's primary oceans by the US Government." Seems like your link proves my point.73.61.8.68 (talk) 01:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
...lesigh...no, you said "This "ocean" doesn't exist, it simply consists of parts of other, real oceans. This supposed ocean is completely surrounded by water, making it naturally part of the surrounding bodies". You didn't say "propose deletion because the US government does not necessarily recognize it". But whatever. Drmies (talk) 01:21, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
if it doesnt even matter to you if the article is even factually correct, and rely on nitpicking in your defense, why do you even care to defend the article from deletion? what value does a false article hold to this website? 73.61.8.68 (talk) 01:28, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
It really is ridiculous that there is no way to force Drmies to have to justify crap like this, with his Admin status on the line.
He just gets away with it, day after day.