User talk:Wonderfool

malacoderm
I can tell from the source (MW 1913) that "tribe" does not likely coincide with the rank of "tribe". It probably should be construed as "group". The "definition" looks to be etymology-derived, further reducing the likelihood that any single modern taxon corresponds. If I cared I'd just get a few cites, adjust the definition accordingly, and probably mark it obsolete or archaic. DCDuring (talk) 16:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Song
I had a dream last night where I was singing parts of this song. I decided to write the whole thing...

I used to rule the words Sysop the first time, second and third Now in the morning I edit alone Sweep the entries I used to pwn

When I was admin thrice Feel the fear in the vandals' eyes Listen to my audios sing Now the sock-king is dead! Long live the king!

One minute I closed RFD Next the RFDs closed on me And I discovered that my reputation stands Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sands

I hear of animals from DCDuring Module wizardry from Benwing Be my mirror, my sword and shield My Wiktionary's in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain I know Donnanz will quote from RAIL Adminship time the third That was when I ruled the words

It was a wicked and wild sin To go rouge and let vandals back in IP blocks and the sound of drums People couldn't believe what I'd become

Bureaucrats wait For my head on a silver plate Just a puppet on a lonely string Oh, who would ever want to be king?

Sgconlaw is WOTDing Romanophile is still editing Be my mirror, my sword and shield My Wiktionary's in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain AryamanA tracked my usernames Adminship time the third That was when I ruled the words

Hear Polansky's rants and raving Equinox's drunken entries saving Be my mirror, my sword and shield My Wiktionary's in a foreign field

For some reason I can't explain I know I still want to delete the main Adminship time the third That was when I ruled the words

JJ72 Bassist (talk) 10:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Cleanup

 * -al forms in Webster - from catechismal

If you want to edit Wiktionary, please follow the process and don't create separate accounts.
Please read up on the appeals process at Meta and follow that. Please stop making sockpuppets. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Move to Wiktionary namespace
It seems like User:AryamanA has stopped maintaining this list, so I think it would make more sense to move this page to Wonderfool. This has precedent with pages like WF (redirects here) and. Ioaxxere (talk) 15:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I support this move. J3133 (talk) 15:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not support this move. I originally would have, but I no longer do. Like many people say in WT:V, it's suspicious whenever WF supports something. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 00:35, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * : Should this be moved to WT:RFM? J3133 (talk) 10:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Uh oh, sounds like Wonderfool's reverse psychology is working on you!
 * —will do. Ioaxxere (talk) 02:49, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Whatever, even if it's reverse psychology. It'll just make me part of the crowd who votes Oppose when WF starts a vote. However I know you will support WF and not like this reasoning because WF started your admin nomination. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 22:09, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Add something to the edit count please
Something like "and honing in on SemperBlotto's second place". Just 3,000 more edits and the silver belongs to WF No hago griego (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Not including logs, of course, which nobody cares about No hago griego (talk) 21:52, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * How about no. What if I follow User:Ioaxxere's lead and remove another section? Daniel.z.tg (talk) 22:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)


 * For the record, the count would put WF in a highly respectable third place in the human edit count, after Equinox and SemperBlotto (honing in on that 2nd place though - not including logs).
 * You should just go and try to add that section yourself. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 22:28, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't. I'm permanently blocked Thyself be knowne (talk) 22:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Removal of "Page moving incident" section
I see the section I wrote was removed in https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User:AryamanA/Wonderfool&diff=prev&oldid=73424928. I don't want it added back. I added the section in the style of the controversies section in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales and other articles about politicians that do this. But then I learned in https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dan_Polansky&diff=prev&oldid=70686085 that WF likes attention. Removing it does avoid giving him further attention. I'm curious, is this reason why you removed the section? Daniel.z.tg (talk) 22:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I removed it because practically everything about it was wrong or misleading. I don't have any problem with the "Count" section though Ioaxxere (talk) 22:28, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I put the "Count" section back. Someone else can perform WF's edit request if they want.
 * I suppose once could say "everything about it was wrong or misleading" about my section. I paraphrased quite heavily from the Wikipedia article so what I wrote might not have been very accurate or relevant for WF's case. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 22:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Exploration of Unbanning: Dictionary-building more important than any specific rules
the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.- Wonderfool is an interesting editor and person. I would like you all to explore the possibility that Wonderfool be actually allowed to keep some particular account consistently. You may say "Wonderfool is used to getting blocked so it doesn't matter" or you may say "Wonderfool is the most flagrant violator of the rules of Wiktionary, the editor should not be unbanned". However, I believe that rules-based systems are entirely SECONDARY to realities. That is to say: rule breaking is only relevant if it actually, clearly detracts from the dictionary-building project of the website. So any rule that goes beyond protecting that mission is absurd. And a person of reliable willingness to engage in dictionary-building like this person is someone that should be encouraged to edit, in my personal opinion. There is some theoretical loss to Wiktionary because the rules might be seen as too flexible. But in a balancing test of: 1) the dictionary-building work of an editor versus 2) the consistency of rule application, I believe that it is possible that (1) may be outweighed by (2), and as such, the rules are junk. Authority and rules are interesting and valuable but ultimately a secondary consideration, which is consistent with the core spirit of Wiktionary. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:51, 24 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I would love for him to be a regular and consistent contributor to Wiktionary if he would follow the process to have his one account unblocked and not use sockpuppets. He doesn't get a pass on the rules. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:42, 25 June 2023 (UTC)


 * See! See! You'd love for the editor to be a regular and consistent contributor! See! That's what I'm talking about, right there! You've seen the value of the editor to dictionary-building. And what I'm saying is that that factor overcomes the rules, because this is not serious business. It's a for-fun, volunteer enterprise, not a religious cult or a government agency or something where strict enforcement of rules is really that important. Justice under the rules is a secondary consideration- the rules are in service to the dictionary-building goal. Added value to the dictionary-building goal is paramount, and if the rules don't serve that goal, it's the rules that are the problem, not the editor. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * No. Forgive the extreme example here but "he rapes but he saves" is not acceptable. I'm not asking for anything unreasonable or outrageous: I'm expecting him to follow the same standard everyone else has to follow. It's not okay to be a drunk driver if you're a volunteer firefighter or to commit a little arson if you donate to a soup kitchen. I wish Wonderfool didn't think it's some hilarious game to break the very simple rules, but he does: I can't control what he thinks. It would certainly be nice to have his constructive edits without all of the pointless drama, but here we are. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:10, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

RFM discussion: June–August 2023
This page seems to no longer be maintained by User:AryamanA and is of general interest to the Wiktionary community. Also: this wouldn't break any links as long as we turn the old page into a redirect. Ioaxxere (talk) 03:00, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. &mdash; excarnateSojourner (talk &middot; contrib) 06:34, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * : On second thought, I prefer Thadh's suggestion to move it to User:Wonderfool. &mdash; excarnateSojourner (talk &middot; contrib) 05:04, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * . (Re broken links: : I think Koavf was referring to the user pages of Wonderfool accounts, which were all redirected to User:AryamanA/Wonderfool; double redirects do not work. As there would be many to fix, a bot could help.) J3133 (talk) 07:56, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:42, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * - There has to be some limit to how much we glorify someone for refusing to behave normally. Project pages are beyond that limit in my view. I'm deleting the Wiktionary namespace page. - TheDaveRoss  22:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC)


 * This is not Wiktionary material, it's userspace material. If you don't want to host it at Aryaman's, host it directly at User:Wonderfool. Thadh (talk) 22:46, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * What Ioaxxere mentioned at User talk:AryamanA/Wonderfool but did not here is that Wikipedia uses the project namespace (see subpages at w:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/List). They have decided (inclduding by four deletion nominations – all kept) that it should be there. J3133 (talk) 23:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This is not a page used to help stifle long-term abuse, it is to make WF feel good. A much less valid rationale for a project page. - TheDaveRoss  23:18, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * WF is definitely not deserving of a project page dedicated to them. Megathonic (talk) 04:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * But I welcome anyone to edit it, I was never the one primarily maintaining it (all the fancy code stuff was added by Erutuon iirc). —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 18:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

RFM discussion: June–August 2023
Not a bad idea either Ioaxxere (talk) 00:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)


 * It's suspicious that WF supports this move. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 22:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Daniel.z.tg WF moved it to Wonderfool (not User:Wonderfool). Do you mean because WF moved the page anywhere you are opposed to moving it anywhere? &mdash; excarnateSojourner (talk &middot; contrib) 16:05, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't really know. This time I just decided to concur with the people who opposed WF recently on WT:V.
 * I originally had weak support for this move. I was thinking there was a minor cleanup benefit, and two people supported it. Then WF moved it which caused me to change my mind. Normally WF starting something is only a small negative point and, as seen in the previous vote or two, usually doesn't cause me to change my mind. There I mainly consider the merits of the proposal itself instead of the champion and I found them concretely beneficial. This time I started out at Weak Support so what WF did was able to move me to (Weak?) Oppose. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 16:53, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keeps it in userspace without implying it "belongs" to any one (non-WF) editor. &mdash; excarnateSojourner (talk &middot; contrib) 16:05, 17 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Thadh (talk) 12:18, 21 June 2023 (UTC)


 * , but it should be made clear that it is not Wonderfool’s user page. J3133 (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Binarystep (talk) 20:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd rather delete User:AryamanA/Wonderfool entirely and have all sockpuppet accounts redirect to User:Wonderfool. Including a long list of sockpuppet accounts and their edit totals just adds to the attention that WF craves and encourages their behavior. WF's original userpage could be modified to contain nothing more than a very brief message saying if you were redirected here from a user's page, it's because they're a sockpuppet of WF. Short and to the point, it lets users know who they are dealing with without adding to the attention that WF gets. The page itself would be set to the template editor/admin lock level to prevent WF from using another sockpuppet to modify it. Megathonic (talk) 04:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. User:Ioaxxere, are you going to fix the double redirects (e.g. with AWB)? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I also agree, now that the vote to unblock WF has been created. The timing of the resolution of this discussion is unfortunate, I think. It would be better to wait until we see the outcome of the vote. Ah, well. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:10, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Moved. Ioaxxere (talk) 02:01, 22 July 2023 (UTC)


 * All of WF's sockpuppets now need to have the redirect link updated. For whoever wants to do it. Megathonic (talk) 02:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Maintaining the contributions count at User:Wonderfool/sockpuppets
Now that WF is unblocked it's going to be awkward to constantly be updating the contributions count. Is there a way to do it automatically? (We might need a bot.) Ioaxxere (talk) 23:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)