User talk:Trottytrottface

Hello, Trottytrottface, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as JimmyJohn1987 (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Kim McGuinness, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matt.

The individual who previously made the change to include the statement I then removed from the Kim McGuinness page is politicising Wikipedia through specific inclusion of purely negative information about one of the candidates to their detriment.

This trend has also occurred on the NE Mayoral Election account where the pattern of creation is significantly skewed towards the independent candidate. This includes selective addition of candidate images to ensure a layout that was not impartial.

This pattern was replicated in the candidate information, where the instigator provided 5 x normal backgrounds to candidates, while the entry for the Labour candidate (Kim McGuinness) was entirely about a process with which the independent has a known conflict of interest, resulting in a very biased representation of the Labour candidate.

My change was simply to rectify that and provide a more appropriate, impartial representation of the candidates in the week of the election. At present, the independent candidate is using Wikipedia as a promotional tool, something I’m sure you would not approve of Trottytrottface (talk) 16:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Kim McGuinness, you may be blocked from editing. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matt,

I think our messages have crossed, sorry for missing this more recent one. I hope my last message made sense. I’m purely trying to ensure that equal and appropriate representation is made of the candidates.

I continued to make the changes as I thought the continue addition was being conducted by someone malicious rather than Wikipedia. However, I do strongly feel that the paragraph I removed is inappropriately added as an intended political slur on the candidate Trottytrottface (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should stop WP:WARring now, revert your blanking of cited material, take any points you have, such as these above, to the talk pages of the relevant articles and gain consensus for your edits.

It is plain you have been editing under multiple user names on various related articles. This is not allowed. A WP:SPI can establish this for certain but it will put those reporting the matter and those investigating to some bother, which will not dispose them well to you. If you own up now by listing the identities you have used, all of them, this may mitigate the sanctions you could face. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]