User talk:ZrbtWm

Hola Zerebat. La RAE no es la autoridad suprema de la manera en que la gente hable o escriba. Aquí se utiliza evidencia de uso escrito (p.ej. en Google Books), y la palabra « inflicción » pertenece en Wiktionary porque muchos escritores la han usado:. Por favor pregunta si tienes alguna duda. Gracias —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 17:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)


 * First of all; the block is partial and only affects one page, which lets you freely edit elsewhere. Edit warring is still edit warring even if you don't break some magical 3 revert rule. The moment you were reverted for removing an entry (again, something you shouldn't do; this is standard Wiktionary practice, and it's hard to blame anyone else for not trying to get a hang of it before doing something this drastic), you shouldn't have chosen to revert it again, even if granted, the revert could have suggested using WT:RFVN which is what you should've done from the start (I always put such a suggestion in my summaries). &mdash; surjection &lang;?&rang; 22:11, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind answer. It's nice to have users like you trying to make this project great. Although I think I am right (because even if I undid a 2nd time that edit, I received that sanction under the basis I'd keep editwarring even if I told him or her I wouldn't do so), in order to avoid creating a heat environment, let's move on. From now, I will abstain from editing in this project completely so I don't upset other users and keep the contents as they want to keep them regardless of what I think. --Zerabat (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't see that as necessary. The "sanction" is barely that, as it only concerns the editing of one page only, and should be viewed through that lens. When disputing the existence of terms or meanings, WT:RFV is the standard way of disputing them (not to be confused with WT:RFD for deleting meanings that may be attestable but should be removed for some other reason). It's a fairly common mistake for editors not familiar with Wiktionary policies to assume that they can just remove entries or meanings on the basis that they don't think they exist, which makes it more understandable. &mdash; surjection &lang;?&rang; 00:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)