Editors
2,038
edits
Difference between revisions of "User talk:LadyLameness"
→Vessel's World
LadyLameness (talk | contribs) |
|||
|
There's obviously a lot you've brought up that I could respond to but honestly after the tone in your last message, I'm not willing to spend more of my Tuesday evening digging into them if I don't think you're actually going to be a team player. I can help create a change proposal if you want - we can set up a separate talk or user sub-page and go through more of the nitty gritty and work out potential implementation and any run off issues that might occur. There may also be another solution that comes up (eg. is there an alternative title that is clearer or a different parameter that would work better? Do we need a 'world' parameter? etc). But I do need to know you are willing to come to the table, collaborate, and work with me, not against me. [[User:LadyLameness|LadyLameness]] ([[User talk:LadyLameness|talk]]) 06:42, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
:: I am again confused by your sudden tonal shift here, at no point have I 'yelled' or resorted to personal attacks. I have acted in a civil manner throughout and the fact that you are jumping to such accusations and not presume good faith despite the [https://coppermind.net/wiki/Help:Guidelines#Etiquette sites own rules] is worrying. (I am also going to link to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith other wiki's page] about the matter considering the brevity of the sites own rule in that regard.) If me simply disagreeing with you is somehow seen as 'incivil' and makes you resort to such rhetoric of me not being a 'team player' then I don't know what to say, the entire point of talk pages is to discuss matters such as this and if your reading anger or maliciousness into someone's reply then that is your own doing. How exactly do you expect others to say they disagree with you if your response will be to accuse them of acting in bad faith towards you personally?
:: Throughout this conversation I have been trying to reach a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus consensus] and despite asking on two separate occasions am still no closer to understanding what exactly your objection is. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#In_talk_pages No reasoning or argument] has been offered beyond saying that we should remodel the entire infobox system, with no clear explanation offered as to why this is needed beyond avoiding editing the pages in question and suggesting that other 'changes' are needed but never specifying what. Only in this response have you offered a possible reason, that being that world for Shards are meant to reflect their 'world,' but offer no reference to a previous discussion about this or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus_can_change why a new consensus can not be achieved] to simply update the vessels to their world of origin, like how the rest of the site appears.--[[User:Debarra|Debarra]] ([[User talk:Debarra|talk]]) 16:30, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
| |||