User talk:Magnus Dominus
I can speak in Old Latin also. So Ancient Romans are free to talk to me in their own language here.
Anyone that's interested and knowledgeable in cryptocurrencies or bitcoin, feel free to contact me here for information sharing. You'll definetely receive your valuable information's worth.
Sherdog.com RfC Closure Has Had No Effect on Wikipedia Because of a Small but Organized Gang of Editors[edit]
Hi. You had participated in the 30-day RfC of Sherdog.com's reliability at RSN here Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_318#Sherdog.com and in the end it was closed to be used only for some basic fight information in the absence of reliable sources such as ESPN, on a case by case basis and with that fact that additional considerations apply on top of it (option 2 or 3).
But some editors (NEDOCHAN, Cassiopeia, Squared.Circle.Boxing, and a couple more) who voted for the reliability of Sherdog.com in the RfC, still enforce the usage of Sherdog.com as the most trusted source on MMA-related pages and go edit-wars for it. They are like a small organized gang of editors that have taken anyting MMA-related hostage on the Wikipedia and act like owners of the whole site. It would be nice if you could help with the enforcement of the result and consensus that were reached there since you helped reaching the consensus in the RfC. Thanks in advance.78.190.164.254 (talk) 16:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
They are especially active on pages Conor_McGregor, Tony Ferguson and Dan Henderson, trying to enforce the usage of Sherdog.com as the source over reliable sources such as ESPN, Fox, UFC.78.190.164.254 (talk) 16:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- I remember that RfC. It looks the closure reflects what you're saying, but you have to be more specific about how they enforce sherdog in those articles. Also, you can always use talk pages to address your concerns about these kind of issues. If they still revert edits that depend on other reliable sources, request administrator assistance. I will take a quick look into the history of those articles to see if I can find anything like you mention, when I have more time.Magnus Dominus (talk) 18:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- What do you mean?Magnus Dominus (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Talking[edit]
Hi. If you would like to open another discussion, please do so. Do be aware, however, that it's an unusual situation. You opened your account in the aftermath of the banning of a user, who liked Latin-style names, who was banned for making edits very much like the one you just made. If you continue to insist on the same points that the banned user did, I will open an SPI prior to any discussion. I will not be drawn into the process by the same banned user. If it turns out that you're not a sockpuppet, then I'll happily discuss.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hello. I suggest you to take a look at WP:ASPERSIONS first. No offense to you but what you're implying is comical. If we go by your definition, every user who has a user name which kind of resembles latin names, and/or registered after one particular user was banned, is a sockpuppet of that user. I've been editing in the Wikipedia for months and this is the first time I see someone accusing me with anything. After months of editing, someone wanted my help in my talk page (and it seems they wanted other people's help too and you seemed to respond in their talk page sections, just like you did in mine). I didn't really care much about it at first, but a few days after, one of the editors that they accused of wrongdoing, replied to me in a very odd way. When I asked them (you) what did they mean with that comment, they didn't reply. I must admit this raised my suspicions and eventually I added those three articles that the IP user wanted my help with, to my watchlist. When I saw you reverting another editor's edit just to keep sherdog.com as a source, I started to review the history of those three articles and those users that were accused of wrongding when I had free time. So, you suddenly accusing me of being a sockpuppet out of nowhere after a simple reinstating of a legit edit raised my suspicions even more. Now, I want you to apologize to me for the accusation or do what does your accusation requires and open an SPI about me with these so-called "proofs". From now on, I'm going to keep a close eye on those articles.Magnus Dominus (talk) 15:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
ANI Notice[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#ANI_against_Magnus_Dominus Kent Bargo (talk) 23:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
(Redacted)[edit]
(Redacted) – 2.O.Boxing 00:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- The same behaviour? User_talk:Squared.Circle.Boxing#ANI
- @Circled Editor, we'll see who's laughing in the end. You all just blamed an innocent guy and lied for to see themselves banned. An Admin/clerk, a checkuser and you obsessed editors. It just feels great there are like 1100 admins more who may eventually review all of this corruption and come to a just conclusion, eventually. Just wait and see ;)Magnus Dominus (talk) 08:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Well, believe it or not, I'm not that guy. I still don't really get how did it all come to this... A former arbitrator, doing a checkuser suddenly, after months of inactivity at WP:SPI, and blatantly lies about "confirmed" status. Zero details. But wait and see. As for your obsession with that banned account, you really need to let it go. You're seeing that guy everywhere. It's like the ending of Stephen King's Misery. You'll go insane pal, just relax.Magnus Dominus (talk) 12:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)