Found him (by accident)...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JC7V7DC5768
Here's a perfect example of what I was talking about.
Who was I rude to? I communicate very well and collaborate with others probably better than most. I had 2 recent issues (one with an IP and one with Chrissymad's revert of me which I self reverted with a stupid edit summary). Can you point to any others?? You are the one being rude and casting aspersions and persoally attacking me. I believe people like Shellwood, Abel, Drmies, Donner60, Cbratbyrudd, Knightrises10, SA Bro13, Megalibrarygirl, the new editors I've helped improve the articles of and many others would disagree with your assessment that I can't communicate-collaborate, or that I am rude. Cherry picking at best. Seriously, I communicate very well with everyone 99 percent of the time. No editor is perfect. I communicated about my self revert on the talk page of the windmill article. I think you were rude to the IP above. I constantly save or try to save new articles from being deleted at NPP, sometimes suggesting they are put in draft space.I always communicate with everyone I revert. Seriously ,why don't you ask all the people who gave me 'thanks' if i am a 'rude' 'uncollaborative' editor. Go on do it. Ask them. And you wonder why this site can't retain new editors, it's because people like you who can't AGF. JC7V-constructive zone 17:51, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the paragraph above is the absolute definition of polite and collaborative. SQLQuery me! 17:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
SQL is talking absolute shit. What you write there is perfectly civil, the slight anger detectable there is understandable since Tony had already given you a dismissive non-answer, telling you you just have to wait until he is good and ready. It's ironic, a genuinely polite Administrator mindful of their role and responsibilities, would have respond to you in a totally different way, even if they were essentially saying the same thing (that he would be giving you diffs later).
Once he finally got around to answering your request for diffs, he merely proved what I was saying.
If Tony thinks this way of responding to a warning is rude.....https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =854199207
...then why doesn't he do anything when established users do far worse by way of reacting to warnings? Really worse. And who is he to say you didn't find that bitey? In fact, and this shows just how much of a douche Tony is being to you, it's perfectly normal for established users to revert warnings, be they hand written, templated, or delivered on a satin pillow in a golden carriage. It is not considered rude, indeed it is accepted this is one of the few privelages users have. The only inference he is entitled to take from it, is that you read it. This is all basic Wikipedia policy.
That is the only actual diff I can see that he provided of you being rude. In other words, he doesn't have shit. The rest were bizarrely him having a problem with you reverting yourself, and not after any incident that could be called rude. Just apparent mistakes or misclicks. On what planet is the ability to spot a mistake and self-revert a bad thing? If only established editors did that more often.
It seems clear they already feel like they can say and do whatever they like to you. Treat you like shit. The more you complain, the worse they will treat you. It simply isn't tolerated, asking Administrators to back their statements up, not from a relative newbie.
It is not possible to overstate the power imbalance there is between someone like you, and Tony, SQL and Bbb23. All three are long term Administrators, totally confident in their position within the hive. No way would you ever get anyone to even listen to a complaint you have against them.
It isn't hard to tell why they're being such assholes, they've already admitted they basically think you're not a new user. On Wikipedia, that basically means it's open season in you. From now on, assuming they even remember who you are, they will feel like they can do whatever they like too you. It doesn't matter one bit to these people that others have shown appreciation of your edits.
Basically, you're screwed.
I'm sorry this is not really help, except if you think about it, it really is. If you quit Wikipedia now, before they kick you out, you will feel so much better, and you won't have wasted God knows how many hours working with these ungrateful assholes as your so called peers.
Why revert vandalism on a project that calls these people trusted users who operate to a higher standard? Bearing in mind the basic standard (so not even the higher standard) is, if you call someone rude, to show them a diff of them being rude. Preferably more than one, since he is trying to say this was characteristic of your editing.
Fuck. That. Shit. Better to be vandalizing Wikipedia surely, make them do some actual goddamn work for their money.