When was I going to be informed of this ridiculous street circus? I suggest that the two above editors should "take a break" and evaluate their own behaviour in relation to matters that are none of their own business. There is absolutely no reason to tolerate the absurd obfuscation put forth by editors that serve as nothing but roadblocks to progress. The category must match the main page, which was renamed by an RM. C2D is the criteria. That poor old request sat in there for months. No one really "opposed" anything, other than to make bunk arguments that have no relevance with regard to the moving of the category, which must happen per C2D. Therefore, I made another request. I was greeted by the above editor, who has no interest in progress. Instead, he labelled the request "controversial", when there is nothing "controversial" at all about C2D. Two pages will match, and must match. That is essential. I refuse to submit to bureaucratic measures introduced by disruptive editors, such as the above mentioned "CfD". There is nothing to discuss. C2D. This is a speedy move. Get on with it. It has been months since the page was renamed, already. What a bunch of rubbish. RGloucester — ☎ 02:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
It was not "challenged". A "challenge" implies substance. If there is no substance, there is no challenge. There is only disruption, which must be punished. RGloucester — ☎ 10:59 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=653102120
When was I going to be informed of this ridiculous street circus? I suggest that the two above editors should "take a break" and evaluate their own behaviour in relation to matters that are none of their own business. There is absolutely no reason to tolerate the absurd obfuscation put forth by editors that serve as nothing but roadblocks to progress. The category must match the main page, which was renamed by an RM. C2D is the criteria. That poor old request sat in there for months. No one really "opposed" anything, other than to make bunk arguments that have no relevance with regard to the moving of the category, which must happen per C2D. Therefore, I made another request. I was greeted by the above editor, who has no interest in progress. Instead, he labelled the request "controversial", when there is nothing "controversial" at all about C2D. Two pages will match, and must match. That is essential. I refuse to submit to bureaucratic measures introduced by disruptive editors, such as the above mentioned "CfD". There is nothing to discuss. C2D. This is a speedy move. Get on with it. It has been months since the page was renamed, already. What a bunch of rubbish. RGloucester — ☎ 02:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_22&diff=653103064&oldid=653101165
It was not "challenged". A "challenge" implies substance. If there is no substance, there is no challenge. There is only disruption, which must be punished. RGloucester — ☎ 10:59 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=653194993
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=653204667
Jesus H. Christ, how can these people type this stuff out without realizing how douchey they come across.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=653213210
I don't fucking care anymore.
Can't say I blame you, "Mr Acid".