User Talk: Blackstardust16

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

June 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not disrespect the principle of WP:CITEVAR ↗ as you are attempting to do on ''Inferno'' (Boards of Canada album) ↗. Your choice to call the established List-defined references ↗ "idiotic" directly runs afoul of the CITEVAR opening, {{tq|Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style, merely on the grounds of personal preference or to make it match other articles, without first seeking consensus for the change}}. Also, given that you have a history of uncivil and improper interactions with other editors as outlined by Admin Serge and tenured editor Rhain on this very talk page, I ask you to kindly keep it cool ↗ before attempting any further action regarding this article. Thank you. '''B'''arnt'''T'''oust 15:04, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

:You added LDRs first without any approval or discussion about them {{diff|Inferno (Boards of Canada album)|1350590202|1350588918|here}} but want to bully anyone who tries to restore them back to the regular referencing style that the article originally used (and the overwhelming majority of articles use). You need to explain how you did not violate WP:CITEVAR ↗ when you decided to change the entire citation style "merely on the grounds of personal preference" and "without first seeking consensus for the change". LDRs create more problems than they solve. How do you solve being able to edit a single section of the article with LDRs? Blackstardust16 (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
::It is just that the sole reason for your involvement in this article has been to mess with the reference style, you have a history of not getting along with other editors in your relatively brief tenure here, and you are using subjective editorialisation in your rationale. Doing the dates my way is perfectly effective, and naming the references by "Publication Subject/Reference Purpose" is plently clear. List-defined references ↗ are a perfectly legit referencing style, one which I established in this article very early on in its creation. If you want to add in a source in-text for a review, you can just add it as an in-text reference, and I'll probably just transfer it to LDR, while retaining the encyclopedic prose content just fine, sometime when I'm banging out edits. And here's my two cents: for me, it is generally a headache to wade through in-text references when editing the code on an article, a sea of technicality amdist prose content. I have written about 70% of the article as it stands, and though nobody WP:OWNS ↗ and article, I pull way more weight than you have on this article and I'd say that my opinions on comfort precede the weight of yours. '''B'''arnt'''T'''oust 15:21, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
:::You are just saying you own the article because you wrote the most though and you are contemptious of anyone who acknowledges that you don't have to follow the standards you place on others. Sorry I'm not in the sweaty basement dwelling club. Blackstardust16 (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
::::@Sergecross73, do you want to address this Blackstardust fella's claim that I'm a "sweaty basement dweller"? Would be a nice follow-up to your final warning ↗ for incivility for this user not a couple weeks ago. '''B'''arnt'''T'''oust 15:36, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::I've messeged Serge privately just because I'm about to head out of home, though I'll leave one final warning for Blackstardust16. You've been blocked already for incivility and edit-warring. If you continue again, your block will be extended. Keep your head calm. Vacant0 (talk • contribs ↗) 15:39, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked

Very disappointed to see that, after countless warnings and a block, the blatant personal attacks keep coming from this account. As you've been told, this is simply not acceptable. Your account is blocked for '''1 month'''. Should you return to Wikipedia after that, you need to follow WP:NPA ↗ and WP:CIV ↗ or the next block will almost certainly be indefinite in length. Sergecross73 msg me 16:24, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

:The only thing you should be doing on your talk page while being blocked is making an WP:UNBLOCK ↗ request. If you make any more comments clearly unrelated to efforts to being unblocked, your talk page access will be revoked for the remainder of the block. Sergecross73 msg me 13:24, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
::https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fwhos-worse-reddit-mods-or-discord-mods-v0-czzrpwf7q82g1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D1080%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D2685c2205171f0cb98d77567c6f7c4013f67eb23 Blackstardust16 (talk) 13:26, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
::{{done}} Vacant0 (talk • contribs ↗) 13:29, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026

<div class="notice" style="background:var(--background-color-destructive-subtle, #fee7e6); border:1px solid var(--border-color-warning, #a66200); color:inherit; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height: 40px">40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock ↗<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been '''blocked ↗''' temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges ↗. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions ↗. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has {{em|also}} been revoked.</div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks ↗, then submit a request to the ''Unblock Ticket Request System ↗''.  Vacant0 (talk • contribs ↗) 13:28, 2 June 2026 (UTC)</div></div>