Thread:Dirtbag Daryl/@comment-26127492-20171119180257/@comment-26127492-20171119191621

Dirtbag Daryl wrote: I re-added it because it's pointing out that the fatality is a reference to a famous Jason kill. and no, it isn't the same, but don't pretend like it isn't even remotely similar. I watched the video the second I saw the link and no, it isn't similar enough to claim that it's the same fatality. I gave you an 'out' in adding it as something separate and you edit-warred all the same. again, that is on you and you alone.

also, I had no reason to start a discussion with you unless I explicitly wanted to because they were changes you wanted to make. the changes you wish to make to a page are on you and you alone. by all means, take a look at the wiki's rules since you're so confused about this.

and no, that's not how edit warring works. you went out of your way to change content already in the page and add your own spin to thing, and this was after the page had been unedited for some time. furthermore, I, a staff member, told you to stop reverting after you did it a second time and you didn't heed this warning. therefore, to put it in terms you understand well, you started it.

as for you being deeply insulted by internet laughing (which wasn't directed towards you personally but your odd editing decisions, but I'm sure you're aware of that), perhaps you should grow some thicker skin.

maybe if you come back in 3 days, though, I'll be sure to not laugh around you since I know it gets you sore now :^)

I didn't add that the fatality is Hotaro's into the article. I simply removed inaccurate information. And no, the fatality isn't a reference to the sleeping bag kill. Could the fatality's name be a reference? Perhaps, but I haven't seen any proof for that either. You keep making big claims, but you sure don't want to justify any of them with anything besides your own assumptions and generalisations.

And do not lecture me on what edit warring is. I have been a consistent and prolific user on the mainstream Wikipedia for years now. I am well versed in what edit warring is, and you are most certainly in the wrong here. Even if we do discuss the problem (which I am more than willing to do), I don't think it would matter because you seem to believe that you own the Wiki because of your adminship. This is an abuse of power, to be certain.

"You started it."

There's that childishness we talked about. Whoever started it is irrelevant. I removed unproven and frankly inaccurate information from the article. Any user is free to edit a Wiki. You are the one who made the revert, and with little justification beyond your claims of "Yes, it IS a reference!" You also have presented zero evidence for anything you have claimed. No matter which way you try to slice the pie, you are guilty.

as for you being deeply insulted by internet laughing (which wasn't directed towards you personally but your odd editing decisions, but I'm sure you're aware of that), perhaps you should grow some thicker skin.

maybe if you come back in 3 days, though, I'll be sure to not laugh around you since I know it gets you sore now :^)

And that is the straw that broke the camel's back. You have just made it clear that you have no intentions of remaining civil. Reply if you want, but I am done here. You clearly are not civilised or responsible enough to hold a position as a staff member, and I will be reporting you now. You had every opportunity to act like an administrator, and you simply refuse to do so.