User talk:Lightburst

I am no friend of most of the editors you unsubtly listed here, but to say this is appallingly poor behavior that just gives them ammunition is an understatement. We gain nothing by stooping to their level. Dronebogus (talk) 11:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, this level? SerialNumber54129 11:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you bringing up something I said over a year ago to a user I’ve long since apologized to? Dronebogus (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps they just want to throw whatever shit they have at you? I dunno why else would someone use a horse's corpse against a editor in good faith. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 09:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Wikipediocracy-related conduct and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Sincerely, Dilettante 19:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upsetting to see...

To follow up my comment here, please make the images central at least? Look at all the unnecessary whitespace! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Lightburst's editing at RfA, EfA, and beyond. Thank you.

Sorry, I know this is, like... your third stint at the WP:DRAMABOARD this month. I really don't want to cause you even more stress, but that comment at QoH's EfA was a whopper, and not the first or even fifth one. I don't think you're Malvolio or anything; this is just something that needs to be addressed. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

theleekycauldron You have filed multiple requests for sanctions against me in multiple forums. I posted my relevant concerns at the QOH RfA and your reaction was to file a monster takedown with a litany of charges. I saw that you also edited an editor's comments at the RM RfA discussion. There are editors who have emailed me to thank me for reinstating their votes at RfA. Not sure if I will participate in your latest sanction requests, I am tuckered out from the Arbcom report and now trying to watch the Vikings - Rams game. Like I said on your talk page, I wish you and I had a do over. Lightburst (talk) 02:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do too. If you don't come back, I genuinely hope you find something happier.

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 09:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think 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 ~~~~}}.

There seems to be emerging consensus at ANI that you should be banned by the community. One administrator wants the discussion to continue a bit longer. In the mean time, I am blocking you indefinitely as a normal administrative action. I will update you when the community discussion concludes. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 08:49, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not allowed to edit ANI now, but I see the discussion and I understand my colleagues loss of patience. Just a note to say, for some reason, Leeky has been accusing me of Gensex violations since I was warned. I messaged Tamzin this year (nothing remotely gensex) and Leeky came to ANI and voted to Cban me mentioning Gensex. In the case of my message on the QOH RfA discussion, it was not remotely Gensex related. (As I said I do not even edit Gensex subjects) I looked at QOH'sontributions and I pointed out some curious actions that looked like drama seeking. Leeky editorialized at this ANI saying: QOH was "doing entirely normal things". That is why we vote, we interpret things differently - I did not think it was normal. I see my comment there was erased now but I still struggle to see what was wrong it.

Finally these past few weeks I have been taken to ANI three times and Arbcom once. One ANI was for when I reverted a merge. After that ANI closed I posted scrambled words on my user page about WPO members who had been trolling me for a long time - and targeted that article. When that ANI closed I was taken to Arbcom where I admitted to my disruption and asked for an investigation into WPO members. Then I made one edit to the QOH RfA discussion and was swiftly taken to ANI again. Let the record show that a person cannot survive three ANIs with Cban requests, and an Arbcom case in such a short time. I saw in the ANI someone said, "Some people we just cannot work with". That deeply hurts, but it is profound, simple, and clearly stated. I have enjoyed growing and editing here. I learned much and I hope I was able to contribute some good. I have no hard feelings. Can I ask for courtesy blanking at the conclusion? I would appreciate it. Lightburst (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is that courtesy blanking of your user page you'd like at the conclusion? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ScottishFinnishRadish Sure, but maybe I do not need it? Is it something that is usually asked for? Lightburst (talk) 18:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, most indef cbanned editors don't request it. In fact there's often controversy about placing the cban notice and replacing the userpage especially on an experienced editor's userpage (which happens at times) since some feel it's like damnatio memoriae. That said, if an editor does want it for whatever reason it's AFAIK normally granted since there's no reason to keep what's on a user page. (The only point of controversy might be whether to delete the userpage, leave it blank, or put a cban notice.) The talk pages will be kept but per WP:OWNTALK you're free to remove everything here while you retain talk access, except if you request an unblock and it's denied. Alternatively just wait or adjust automatic archival settings if you'd prefer that. Nil Einne (talk) 01:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have copied over your response to ANI. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sorry about the hurtfulness of this experience. I hope you don’t feel bound in soul to your condemnation by the crowd. While these usernames may have a right to decide your behavior is too problematic for them to continue dealing with, they don’t have a right to humiliate you, so please don’t feel humiliated. And I hope the vile harassment against you ceases. If I had my name published online because of a bunch of forum-dwellers weak enough to be swayed into a dissident morality that exalts pointless, witless cruelty just within the boundaries of a phpBB instance, I’d be seething. Best of luck to you! ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words @Zanahary:!

I hoped to finish up at Arbcom and the ANI was surprising. I was surprised because my concerns in the QOH discussion were about the actions of the candidate and seemed relevant. Serial Number said my comment there was trolling and should be removed. Then Leeky came with a Gensex comment asking for someone to remove it? So this baffles me; it is entirely possible that I am too dense to understand.

My comment in the RM RfA was also mentioned by Leeky. I saw people in that discussion struggling to articulate their assessment of RM's style. Leeky removed someone's attempt to describe it. I tried to put words to my own thoughts about their style and I guess it came off the same.

I apologize that my recent actions have been disruptive and I apologize that so many disputes have been escalated by me. The events at the heart of the disruptions finally got to what might be a proper venue. I hope some of you will join the Arbcom debate in my place as it seems on track to be an actual case! Maybe some good will come from all of this. I really am grateful for the experience. Thanks again to everyone! And darn it LilianaUwU I thought it was back on! Rats! Lightburst (talk) 18:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, Leaky may have decided to take you down as you seem to have been the biggest spoiler in her so far stunningly successful RFA reform effort. I put quite a bit of energy into that exactly 10 years ago but achieved almost nothing, so know how hard it is. Many much finer editors than me have banged their head against that wall and also failed. It's too early to be sure, but Leaky's effort might even eclipse the reforms of Biblioworm & Barkeep themselves (the only two reformers to have enjoyed any success). So can understand her being protective, if that's the motivation. Anyway, thanks for all you've done here Lightburst. They say the ~~darkest~~ brightest light casts the darkest shadow and you've certainly proved that, but you've still been an inspiration to many and much of your fine work here will long continue to benefit readers. FeydHuxtable (talk) 19:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FeydHuxtable: Thanks, odd that we never edited together. I was unfamiliar with your efforts to reform RfA. I think I only ever ran into you on the boards. I typed up the QOH comment weeks ago, but not to spoil, I thought it was worth looking at. In Leaky's RfA the vote was 300 to 1 and editors wanted to erase that one oppose, but I would not let them. That was an unpopular position and Leeky did not like it either. Same happened other times in other RfAs like the SDKB RfA. They would not let me reinstate an oppose so I took the place of the oppose voter. There were others, but both the SDKB and Leeky oppose reinstatements garnered quite a bit of anger from the majority voters.

Good luck to you and stay golden Pony Boy! Don't feel bad for me, I will examine my own actions. Also please tell them it is time to close. Thanks @Liz: for asking them to hold up a bit so I could read and respond but I woke up blocked and now I am just rambling around my talk page like a goof. @Rhododendrites: When I die I want to come back as you. I appreciate you and your even personality and knowledge. Lightburst (talk) 20:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I used to do quite a big of article rescuing in the early days, but lack the perseverance of some of the finer ARS editors so had largely quit the field by the time you arrived. It was inspirational to see folk like yourself carry on the torch. ( @ User:Hako9 thanks for the catch on my mistake ). Not 100% if Im 'Pony Boy' but if so that's one of the sweetest things I've been called for a while. I'll pass on the message. As for examining your own actions, yes some recent edits have been beneath you, but we're all products of our environment. The recently departed Philip Zimbardo maybe overstates that, but he's partly right. Even the Light Himself didn’t always keep perfect composure during His time on this wicked earth. The community has let you down IMO ( Excepting noble voices like Trypto & a good few others.) . Thanks for the kind words. FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: Thank you for all you have done to help me. The informal agreements you made held all this time! I apologize for the message, but that editor was just trolling here. I saw your previously warning is still on their talk page. I did not want to start more drama, but maybe you can have a look. I removed it. Lightburst (talk) 20:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Tryptofish: You invested a lot of capital and time in me. I am sorry that I spoiled it with my flailing around. I won't forget your help and guidance. If you are ever in the midwest look me up and we'll get coffee or some other lava-hot liquid - I mean it is almost winter right? Lightburst (talk) 20:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That means a lot to me, it really does. For whatever it's worth, indefinite does not have to mean infinite. If you decide that you want to, and if you're willing to put in the work, you can still eventually come back from this. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This morning I was imagining three people inviting me on a fishing trip. They are in a row boat. When I arrive, I jump in and start rocking that boat. Telling them how to improve the fishing experience. Guess what, the three fisherman are not going to want me in the boat next time. Makes sense to me! I think I have used up all the goodwill that Lightburst was accorded on Wikipedia. I am still amazed that we went from snarling at each other to toleration and then to a kind of mutual respect. You gave me hope that I could repair things with other people I was cross with like @Levivich:, and I did. I tried with Serial Number but we never got there, we are still leering at each other across the room. Lightburst (talk) 21:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SMcCandlish: Whenever I start feeling like I know something I reflect on the AfD where we met like 6 years ago. I learned so much during that AfD - I was completely incompetent! I was clicking those links and fumbling around. Back then I was married to the idea of saving everything, now I vote delete as often as keep. I have enjoyed reading your comments ever since. @Tamzin: I appreciate you. Regarding your comment to me, it was read and responded to in my head. lol. I do that with messages sometimes. I have family that are refugees in the middle east - because of my background I have done my best to steer clear of Palestine-Israel issues. This is a rehash but when I saw you had closed a discussion on Palestine-Israel, I noted the large star of David because you pulled up a sleeve and aimed the star at the camera on your user page - clearly an important symbol that you want to share. I think if I had a Star and crescent on my user page editors would take note of that while reading my close of related subjects. I read your response so I know we disagree on it. Leeky seemed to read what I said while assigning malicious intent and immediately went to ANI. Same thing with the QOH discussion, went to ANI immediately and did not even ping or discuss. I am sorry that I fumbled a compliment on your talk so badly we have now typed many paragraphs about it. Keep on editing Tamzin. Lightburst (talk) 21:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1 to what Tryptofish said; this is something one can come back from. But it requires a long break, and a lot of introspection, and convincing the community that you understand what their concerns were and won't be repeating the behaviors that raised them. Much of the above is already heading in this direction, and that is a good sign. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be making a comeback. Lightburst (talk) 22:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for what it's worth, I hope you do, many years from now. I think this is the right outcome for everyone involved - you personally, the encyclopedia, the people who talk shit about you at WPO, the people still feeling hurt by something you've done, everybody - and I think it should have happened sooner than it did. But I hope you get another shot at editing until you're 100. For now I hope you get to relax, read some good books, and let all of this go. -- asilvering (talk) 00:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About the QoH thing from what you've said above I'm assuming no one has talked to you about this before other, other than that your comment wasn't acceptable so I'll try since IMO it's important if you do ever decide to come back. Requests for removal of rights at AN are hardly uncommon. It might be that some page somewhere suggests some other option for requests of removal of rights, but it's hardly surprising if editors especially in a time of great stress or whatever do not look into these and just make a request at AN. This applies even if they've never seen such requests before since it's the obvious place to make such requests. But definitely for someone like me who has seen a number of such requests throughout the years there's a fair chance I would have just done so there until yesterday without a second thought. It's never even occurred to me that someone making such a request is trying to make drama, and even you having said it it still makes absolutely no sense. Since you genuinely believe it, if you do ever decide to come back, I suggest you take a long introspection into why you feel that way since I don't think it's compatible with WP:AGF or a collaborative environment. (In fact while when I think about it more, it's seems obvious that there is another way to make such a request since while I've seen a bunch I'm fairly sure there must have been a lot more, and also AN is a fairly high profile environment for something so innocuous, I don't think it's ever even occurred to me before that there must be such a place.)

While requests for re-instatement of rights are from vague memory less common at AN, I'm fairly sure I've seen them before and as much as anything they're probably less common since it's much more likely editors have decided to give up their rights than give them back. Also they may come at a time of less stress, which might give more time to think about and have an obvious other target to ask to get back rights (the admin who removed them). Still it's hardly surprising if the thinking leads an editor down the path of just asking where they asked for them to be removed rather than the admin who removed them or anything else. Also while they may come at a time of less stress this doesn't mean no stress. Especially in a situation like that with such a short time frame, it's foolish to assume that everything is magically right. It's just that the editor feels more up to editing Wikipedia. Remember that while Wikipedia can cause a great amount of stress, for some editors and in certain situations it can be cathartic for some people. And while it's not therapy, provided editors aren't expecting a lot of leeway or causing problems, we don't care if editors are using it in that way. In other words, even for the request for return of rights, there's absolutely no reason to think it was anything other than a simple request which they never thought anyone would give more than a thought about, and thinking anything more of it is really a failure to WP:AGF and incompatible with a collaborative environment.

BTW, I didn't state this at the ANI since I felt it too irrelevant but I detest WPO. However my detest for WPO doesn't justify me personally attacking on Wikipedia those who post there. Perhaps it would be fine for me to do so on my own blog, Twitter whatever, although I wouldn't do it since it's not something that interests me. I don't disagree that we've handled WPO poorly, but I'm not convinced anything you've done has helped us in that path, it's just made it worse including have unnecessarily endeared sympathy to participants. I've never looked at what anyone has said about you there but from what others have said it sounds horrible. So I can understand to some extent why you've lashed out unfortunately the fact you did so means Wikipedia has to protect itself.

I mentioned I wasn't particularly supportive of topic banning Homeostasis07, one of the reasons I because while I also felt what they were doing was just making things worse rather than helping, they seemed to have stayed away from the personal attacks against specific individuals or other extremes of your behaviour. (From what I saw anyway one of the reasons I never !voted besides it seeming pointless is because I couldn't be bothered to look into it more.) In other words, from my PoV even terms of lashing our from mistreatment, yours was IMO way beyond tolerable. Still I could see why editors felt that topic banning Homestasis07 was the best option since it didn't preclude them taking what many felt was the only way to deal with WPO namely arbcom (open case or not that's up to arbcom to decide what they can handle); while stopping what they felt was disruptive and definitely not helping anything. I say all this to emphasise that support for any of these actions for what I expect many editors has nothing to do with any sympathies for WPO. We may detest it while also want to stop disruption coming from it from any editor.

Nil Einne (talk) 01:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this Wikipedia or an old melodrama? 2600:1008:B0CC:2F22:9A01:44B7:75:7990 (talk) 05:45, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]