Editing Eurovision Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (section)

== @Shiningr3ds: Article talk page bludgeoning and uncivil communication ==

{{userlinks|Shiningr3ds}}

I am saddened that I find myself writing this, but this editor has not listened despite many warnings from many editors. For a bit of background, a [[Talk:Yeison Jiménez#Merge proposal|merge proposal]] was opened for a [[2026 Paipa Piper PA-31 crash|now redirected aviation article]]. There was some discussion, and it was in contention up until the end, at which point multiple editors gave their support for it, leading to a consensus for merging the article. @Shiningr3ds [[User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-Shiningr3ds-20260212134100-11WB-20260212131300|made clear early on]] that they were prepared to challenge it. They eventually did only 6 days later on 16 March... [[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-Shiningr3ds-20260316154900-Merge_review|on the same talk page]]. [[WP:MERGEREVIEW]] states that [[WP:AN]] is the correct venue, so [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260316211200-Thebiguglyalien-20260316165000|it was moved there]] after another pointless back-and-forth discussion.

During all of this, @Shiningr3ds has continuously bludgeoned, ignored advice given by involved and uninvolved editors, failed to [[WP:AGF|AGF]] and cast [[WP:ASPERSIONS]]. ([[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-Amakuru-20260316173300-11WB-20260316172400|1]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-Rosbif73-20260317123700-Shiningr3ds-20260317121700|2]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-11WB-20260317150800-Shiningr3ds-20260317144600|3]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-Blue-Sonnet-20260317152900-Shiningr3ds-20260317124100|4]]). They have now gone to the closer's talk page and [[User_talk:ScrubbedFalcon#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318134100-ScrubbedFalcon-20260318131300|demanded answers to their questions]]. I don't blame @ScrubbedFalcon in the slightest for [[User_talk:ScrubbedFalcon#c-ScrubbedFalcon-20260318140700-Shiningr3ds-20260318134100|declining to do so]]. This has been pretty exhausting for most involved. I myself have probably responded more than I should have, however I did so in the hopes this editor would eventually realise there are better way to achieve things. As I write this, they have [[User_talk:ScrubbedFalcon#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318143400-11WB-20260318141200|accused me]] of harassing them... Unsure where to go from here, but this whole thing has been pretty ridiculous and unnecessary. I believe an enforced break from talk pages would benefit this editor, as they have [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260317151500-11WB-20260317140000|themself said]] they are exhausted.

I will alert @Shiningr3ds of this AN/I after posting this. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  14:43, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:I also wrote an ANI submission, but submitted right after 11WB. Copy and pasted below, please forgive it being worded as a new submission.{{pb}}I'm very sorry that it has come to this. Shiningr3ds has repeatedly not assumed good faith in their request for a [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Close review at Talk:Yeison Jiménez#Merge proposal|close review at AN]], cast [[WP:ASPERSIONS]] on me and other editors on my talk page (see [[User talk:ScrubbedFalcon#Merge review|[1]]]), and continued to [[WP:BADGER]] editors after being warned and asked to stop by multiple editors. For example:{{pb}}1. They cast aspersions on my choosing not to engage with them directly in the conversation due to a concern that it would escalate here: [[User talk:ScrubbedFalcon#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318134100-ScrubbedFalcon-20260318131300|[2]]]<br>2. They accused @[[User:11WB|11WB]] of harassing them because the editor followed a link I left to the conversation at AN here: [[User talk:ScrubbedFalcon#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318143400-11WB-20260318141200|[3]]]<br>3. They have badgered (and cast aspersions) on me and other editors: [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318142100-ScrubbedFalcon-20260318140700|[4]]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260317124100-11WB-20260317122800|[5]]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260317133900-Amakuru-20260317130800|[6]]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260317144600-Discussion|[7]]]<br>4. They were warned and asked to stop: [[User talk:ScrubbedFalcon#c-11WB-20260318141200-ScrubbedFalcon-20260318140700|[8]]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#c-11WB-20260317150800-Shiningr3ds-20260317144600|[9]]]{{pb}}There could be more, but I need to sign off for a few hours right now. [[User:ScrubbedFalcon|ScrubbedFalcon]] ([[User talk:ScrubbedFalcon|talk]]) 14:48, 18 March 2026 (UTC) [[User:ScrubbedFalcon|ScrubbedFalcon]] ([[User talk:ScrubbedFalcon|talk]]) 14:53, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::{{edit conflict}} I've been accused [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260317114200-Discussion] of not reading the original discussion & close as well as not understanding policies before posting and I've got no idea how or why they reached this conclusion. 
::I presume it's either because I didn't agree with their position, or didn't personally answer all of their questions in the "Discussion" section (which didn't appear to be aimed at uninvolved editors). [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 15:08, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::(Sorry if you edit conflicted with me!) [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  15:18, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Just saw this, sorry! It's totally fine 'cause ANI moves so quickly sometimes - I can't remember who the conflict was with anyway, I ended up redoing the edit manually to be safe. [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 22:09, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:Honestly, I no longer care if I get blocked. After being accused of "harassment" for simply asking a question to someone who explicitly said they were happy to answer questions, I've lost any desire to participate in discussions on English Wikipedia. But I won't let myself be painted as a serial rule-breaker, because I don't believe I did anything wrong.
:First, @[[User:11WB|11WB]] himself is guilty of bludgeoning the discussion. Instead of actually reading and analyzing the sources I provided, he kept repeating "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yeison_Jiménez#c-11WB-20260211180600-Shiningr3ds-20260211180400 no SIGCOV]" — and later [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yeison_Jiménez#c-11WB-20260316203500-Shiningr3ds-20260316202900 admitted that SIGCOV actually exists]. That's exactly why I had to respond in detail.
:Second, yes, you are harassing me — and even another editor [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-Zaptain_United-20260317235000-Shiningr3ds-20260317194800 confirmed it]. You comment on literally every move I make, and despite claiming to follow [[WP:COAL]], you keep engaging with me. I never asked for that.
:The main accusation is that I was "harassing" someone. That's simply not true. I asked the closer straightforward questions about his closure — because [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-ScrubbedFalcon-20260317004500-Closer_(ScrubbedFalcon) he himself said he was happy to answer them]. When he didn't, I'll admit, it felt intentional. I left a message on his talk page asking him to respond, noting that if he didn't want to, he could just say so. His reply was that it "wouldn't be helpful." So I asked a fair question: what would be helpful? Ignoring me like I don't exist? I genuinely don't understand what I'm being accused of.
:As I've said, I no longer care about the outcome of the review. I've lost the will to participate in discussions after being accused of harassment for simply asking a question. [[User:Shiningr3ds|Shiningr3ds]] ([[User talk:Shiningr3ds|talk]]) 15:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::You are welcome to cite that comment from @[[User:Zaptain United|ZU]], but they are currently blocked, so I am unsure how convincing that argument will be to others. I have actually only communicated with you in respect of this specific article. We have not had discussions elsewhere on the project. Other areas to which you contribute are not a concern of mine, so hopefully that dispels any concerns editors may have of your accusation that I've been "following you". I welcome editors reading this to check my edit history to confirm that what I've said in this reply is the truth.
::On COAL, I have tried to follow that. Unfortunately, the way you have communicated in these discussions has made it very hard not to reply. I will take responsibility for that, absolutely. [[User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-11WB-20260212131300-WP:COAL|I've said since the beginning]] that it's better to say your piece and let consensus take effect. Despite that happening with the merge review (the consensus part, not the communication), you have challenged that process and won't listen to anybody who disagrees with you.
::You are not a "serial rule breaker" and neither me nor anyone else has suggested as such. It is simply your behaviour and choices over the period of these discussions that has made it extremely difficult for others to be able to engage with you in a constructive and civil way. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  15:16, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::@[[User:11WB|11WB]], whether Zaptain is blocked or not doesn't change the fact that his observation was accurate — and it was made publicly, for everyone to see. Wikipedia is open to everyone — a block doesn't erase what someone saw. You've commented on nearly every discussion I've been part of, in multiple venues. That's not "following" in the sense of stalking, but it's certainly persistent engagement. 
:::You say you tried to follow COAL, yet you kept replying. That's your choice — and your responsibility. I didn't ask you to. The difference between you and editors like Amakuru or Aviationwikiflight is that they actually addressed my arguments. You didn't. You kept repeating the same points without addressing what I actually said, which dragged the discussion out more than anything I did.
:::I didn't just disagree for the sake of it. I disagreed because I genuinely believed — and still believe — my position was policy-based and well-sourced. If I had just given up and agreed with everyone, that wouldn't have been consensus; it would have been surrender.
:::The same thing you're accusing me of — refusing to listen — could easily be said about you. You repeated the same points over and over without ever engaging with my sources or my policy breakdown. That's what made this discussion so exhausting. [[User:Shiningr3ds|Shiningr3ds]] ([[User talk:Shiningr3ds|talk]]) 15:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::I have addressed your arguments actually... 
::::*[[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-11WB-20260316201300-Shiningr3ds-20260316200900|I described the sources you provided and whether they can be used for a standalone article]].
::::*[[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-11WB-20260211152900-Shiningr3ds-20260211150800|I cited NOTINHERITED here]]. I chose not to go into greater detail as I believed @Rosbif73's [[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-Rosbif73-20260113074200-Shiningr3ds-20260113050600|explanation on notability]] supplemented it adequately.
::::*[[User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-11WB-20260212142000-11WB-20260212141800|Explained how there is a lack of SIGCOV beyond contemporary coverage]]. I cited [[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-Aviationwikiflight-20260212130000-Rosbif73-20260112101000|this comment]] from @Aviationwikiflight for this.
::::As the editor [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2026 Paipa Piper PA-31 crash|who opened an AfD on the article]], and then [[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-11WB-20260112153800-Rosbif73-20260112101000|!voted at the merge proposal]], I feel it is expected that I would be apart of any discussions that follow on the same talk pages... [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  15:48, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::To stop this falling back into the same looping discussions we've already had, I think it is more appropriate now to discuss a way forward. AN/I deals with editor conduct, not article matters. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  15:51, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Seriously? Out of dozens of messages you sent, you're pointing to just three — one of which was a complete strawman (analyzing a random source I never used for notability), and the other two I already refuted, yet you kept repeating them. And you're calling that "addressing my arguments"? That's honestly laughable.
:::::And no, you didn't just "participate." You constantly shut me down with [[WP:BLUDGEONING]] accusations — while I was simply responding to other editors in the "Discussion" section, which exists exactly for that.
:::::Yes, I fully expect another bludgeoning accusation after this. Go ahead. [[User:Shiningr3ds|Shiningr3ds]] ([[User talk:Shiningr3ds|talk]]) 16:08, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::I've stepped away for some time so I could think about how to respond to this (and if it was even worth responding). You have attempted to get a rise out of me, which is a shame. I am actually not here as an adversary. I've even defended you ([[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-11WB-20260316173800-Amakuru-20260316173300|1]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-11WB-20260317121000-Shiningr3ds-20260317120600|2]]). You used the word "surrender" in [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318153500-11WB-20260318151600|your reply from this afternoon]], rather than "concede". "Surrender" strongly implies that you see Wikipedia as a [[WP:BATTLEGROUND]], and [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-Zaptain_United-20260317235000-Shiningr3ds-20260317194800 this comment from @ZU], specifically "going against the status quo", even after a [[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-ScrubbedFalcon-20260310140000-Merge_proposal|consensus forms]], [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Close review at Talk:Yeison Jiménez#Merge proposal|is endorsed]] by the community, your choice [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318162000-Shiningr3ds-20260318161400|is to continue arguing]].
::::::[[User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318164900-11WB-20260318144300|This reply]] sums up your motives. You are fully aware of everything that has happened, and have read all the warnings myself and other editors have given you to stop. This has clearly all been to prove a [[WP:POINT]]. I've done my very best to actually offer some help through all of this, I've let you know along the way that going forward with this, in this manner, is not a good idea ([[User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-11WB-20260310152100-Shiningr3ds-20260310151700|1]], [[Talk:Yeison_Jim%C3%A9nez#c-11WB-20260316204600-11WB-20260316204500|2]]). All I have left to say is, your approach to a collaborative project is unpleasant and fundamentally incompatible. I can't see how an editor can contribute to this project effectively if they only believe they are right, and believe everyone else is wrong. To echo what others have said, there has been a complete failure on your part to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. I am quite saddened by this.
::::::(As an extra note: [[User_talk:Shiningr3ds#c-Shiningr3ds-20260318164900-11WB-20260318144300|you said]] that you're facing the prospect of a block/ban. You have said in this AN/I that I am also guilty of several things, so I guess we are in the same boat on that one.) [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  21:33, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not trying to "get a rise" out of you. I'm responding to accusations. 
:::::::You say you're not an adversary, yet you've commented on almost every post I made, and repeatedly told me to stop engaging while continuing to engage yourself. That's not "help."
:::::::You quote Zaptain's comment about "going against the status quo" as if it's a bad thing. It's not. Consensus isn't static, and questioning it isn't battleground behavior — it's how Wikipedia improves. The problem is, you never addressed my arguments. You dismissed sources without reading them, repeated "no SIGCOV" long after it was disproven, and when I pointed that out, you called it bludgeoning. 
:::::::You say I see Wikipedia as a battleground. I see it as a place where arguments should matter. When they're ignored, I push back. That's not "incompatible" — that's called having principles. [[User:Shiningr3ds|Shiningr3ds]] ([[User talk:Shiningr3ds|talk]]) 03:15, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

* {{ping|Shiningr3ds}}, I'm going to be blunt here: your conduct in this, as far as I can tell, has simply been "you didn't comply with ''my'' assessment, therefore you are all wrong!". That's not an argument that is likely to succeed here on Wikipedia. We operate on [[WP:CONSENSUS]]. If you can't persuade other editors to a position you hold, you have to accept that consensus is not with you. Now, [[WP:1AM|it's not ''always'' true that everyone else is ''right'']], and [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]], but the manner in which you have gone about this only makes it look more and more like you are [[WP:NOTCOMPATIBLE|not compatible with a collaborative project]]. I would ''strongly'' suggest you [[WP:STICK|drop the stick]] and move on to editing other articles/topics on Wikipedia. - [[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] <sub>[[User talk:The Bushranger|<span style="color: maroon;">One ping only</span>]]</sub> 22:01, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' You know, I've spent a few hours thinking about all this and how best to explain what happened and why. Apologies as this post is a bit long, but I feel it's important to say (also sorry for any typos, I think I've got them all but I might miss one or two). 
:I got the impression that the underlying cause of all this was a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia consensus works. It can be counterintuitive sometimes, so it does happen. 
:Wikipedia works because it's edited by many thousands different people, all working towards the same goal. 
:When the community decides to do something en masse, a consensus needs to form - a.k.a. the will of the many. The will of the few (usually) can't be followed, because that's not how consensus works.
:Whilst individual people are important, everyone here is equal and no-one is more important than anyone else - no matter how strongly they feel or how vocal they are. 
:Every decision will have someone who doesn't agree with it, and the community isn't obligated to justify every decision it makes to the satisfaction of every individual editor - it just couldn't function like that, everything would stop dead as we get bogged down with persuading and justifying everything to everyone. We'd end up talking about everything, unable to '''do''' anything.
:'''Shiningr3ds''', you're perfectly entitled to ask questions, but that ''doesn't'' mean that you're automatically entitled to an answer, nor must or be an answer that you're personally happy with. The Wikipedia community doesn't have to justify it's decisions to you as an individual and keep going until you're satisfied. 
:Other editors will try their best to explain things if you ask politely and respectfully, but they're not obligated to do this. We're all volunteers, doing this in our own time.
:If you want to stay at this community project, you'll need to understand that things will happen here that you don't agree with. There will be decisions that you don't like or don't understand. 
:Pretty much everyone reading this post has had that happen in the past and will have it happen again - but you can't metaphorically shove a stick in the wheel of progress until you are happy with what you see. If you do, others will have to take the stick off you and ask you to please leave the premises. 
:Nobody wants that.
:I hope you stay here, so please take this message to heart. For Wikipedia to function, we need to work '''with''' each other, not against each other. [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 00:11, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
::I'm about to head out for the night. I just want to say, I am sorry to @Shiningr3ds for making them feel like they've been harassed during these discussions. I feel very strongly about editor retention, and I fear that multiple editors may now feel discouraged from continuing to contribute. This doesn't sit well with me, especially if I've added to this... [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  00:28, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
:::I don't think the way you treated me was exactly the kind of approach that would encourage retention — but I'll take this as a step forward. [[User:Shiningr3ds|Shiningr3ds]] ([[User talk:Shiningr3ds|talk]]) 04:41, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
::@[[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue-Sonnet]], thank you. This is probably the kindest and most constructive response I've received in this entire mess.
::I understand how consensus works — I really do. But what I saw in this discussion wasn't a weighing of arguments. It was a vote count dressed up as consensus, with my sources and policy analysis simply ignored by most participants.
::To be fair, Amakuru and Aviationwikiflight did engage with my points — even if I disagreed with their conclusions. That's all I ever wanted: someone to actually read what I wrote and respond to it. Instead, I got months of repetition, dismissal, and eventually accusations of harassment for asking questions...
::I'm not asking for everyone to agree with me. I'm asking that my arguments be addressed.
::I'll take what you said to heart. Thank you again. [[User:Shiningr3ds|Shiningr3ds]] ([[User talk:Shiningr3ds|talk]]) 03:23, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
:::No problem, I'm glad this helped! [[User:Blue-Sonnet|Blue Sonnet]] ([[User talk:Blue-Sonnet|talk]]) 11:24, 19 March 2026 (UTC)