User talk:Itsthesoftlifeforme

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 11:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know Jimmy personally and he is a man who calls himself a man. Stop pretending people are trans when they aren't. Stop gatekeeping shit.

I also knew SOPHIE, including when he was a man called Samuel Long. It's a fact, and it belongs on wikipedia. Again, stop gatekeeping. If you revert my edits again I will initiate a dispute. Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 16:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve reverted your edit again on the SOPHIE article because as I said in the edit summary, we have a policy on inclusion of deadnames (MOS:DEADNAME) and your edit contravened that. Initiate a dispute if you wish, but be aware you’re editing against existing policy. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 16:35, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop erasing facts, idiot. Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 09:27, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DEADNAME doesn't apply because Sam Long was notable under this name prior to transition. Stop trying to impose censorship on facts.

I'll wait for you to reply before re-reverting your reversion, because an edit war is pointless, but I'm confident that you are not correct here.

Source: I knew the person concerned personally Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 11:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give you one warning to be aware of WP:NPA; calling editors "idiots" is not particularly well regarded here. As for your belief that MOS:DEADNAME does not apply here, there was a request for comment on Sophie's page which determined there was no consensus for inclusion of her former name under this policy, and an express consensus against including in the lede. Any edit restoring this would be going against that decision. Whether or not you knew the subject of the article is not really relevant to existing policies. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 11:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want to be called an idiot, don't behave like one.

Knowing the subject of the article personally means that my knowledge is literally more valuable than yours on this topic. Whether you like it or not.

If nobody with such personal knowledge commented on your RFC, that demonstrates the uselessness of any decision derived from it, not the opposite.

Sophie released music under birth name, too, and it's absurd to pretend that it never existed. Nobody is harmed by this. You are gatekeeping, presumably for egotistical reasons.

I'm not playing this game with you. I'll replace the edit and if you revert it again I'll dispute it. Don't reply again. Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 12:21, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This will be my final reply, only because I am mandated to do so;

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 12:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grow up, and stop being such a pathetic gatekeeper.

I've already explained why you're wrong.

Stop making a fool of yourself. Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 10:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.discogs.com/artist/4469865-Samuel-Long

You are making an idiot of yourself. The MOS policy doesn't apply because Sophie was notable under previous name, Samuel Long. As I've told you several times.

Are you going to clean up the mess you've made and apologise? Prick. Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 11:02, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: as blocking admin I'm just giving you a shout per the above comments and continued NPA violations in the unblock request. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 12:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really how you spend your life? Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 23:12, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2025 (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).

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

Request reason:

MOS:Deadname doesn't apply because SOPHIE was notable under previous name. Ser is gatekeeping for ego reasons and is not acting in good faith. My edits are appropriate and should be restored. Ser needs some discipline. Source: https://www.discogs.com/artist/4469865-Samuel-Long Itsthesoftlifeforme (talk) 11:03, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I can find no evidence of this and even if true, why there'd be a compelling need to add that to Sophie (album). Yamla (talk) 11:12, 13 April 2025 (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.

Note that discogs is specifically an unreliable source. See WP:RS. --Yamla (talk) 11:13, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.