This is the thread we use to talk things over with people who have received a suspension notice. A lot of the time the notice goes out just so we can explain how seriously we take certain things, not because we want the person to feel bad and go away.
If you're suspended, give What to Do If You Are Suspended a read, then post here to begin your appeal. We try to respond to appeals in order via batch posts every few days. If a moderator has responded to your appeal, you will receive a notification in your private messages, even if you're suspended from PMs.
The Forum Rules
apply here.
Don'ts
- Don't be rude. Rule 1 applies here, too.
- Don't try to negotiate your suspension outside of this thread, such as by sending Private Messages to moderators or posting elsewhere. Such activity may be thumped or otherwise removed, and may warrant an additional suspension block if it keeps happening. All communications have to take place within this thread.
- Don't respond to other suspended users. This is a place for you to discuss your suspension, not others'.
- Don't spam the thread about your appeal, since it makes it more difficult to compose responses. If you've posted, we're likely looking at it, and kindly request you to be more patient.
- Don't make another account to try and get around your suspension. This is called ban evasion and will get you bounced. (Again, read What to Do If You Are Suspended if you don't know what these words mean.)
Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 30th 2025 at 11:56:51 AM
Ok, it's Sunday. Time to unsuspend me.
Ecclytennysmithylove: Suspension lifted. Happy troping.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.I'm not sure why I'm edit banned in the first place. I've been editing articles the same way for the past seven months
Quoting straight from your file:
I didn't delete all those entries, I just simply edited a description for what I thought was moderator mandated. The one who did delete them is ElectG-Max.
edited 19th Jan '14 10:18:18 AM by despoa
You're right, that was an error, probably caused by multiple mods attending the same report.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"So, got my first offense after three years of being avid troper, apparently for some Word Cruft and inadvertently sparking a minor Edit War on the 2012 page. Wasn't my intention to ruffle any feathers, especially by arguing over such a minor plot quibble to begin with.
My bad guys, lesson learned.
Our concern is with that, but also with the fact that, after said three years, you have to be reminded about Natter, Example Indentation, and Justifying Edits. We want to make sure that you understand and follow our editing policies, so this doesn't happen again.
edited 20th Jan '14 11:12:33 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It would appear that I have had my editing privileges suspended, most likely due to something involving the Invincibility Power-Up page. Specifically...
- I added something to a page, as a subpoint instead of editing the point. Apparently, a policy against that had sprung up, which I hadn't noticed because I tend to go directly to pages by entering their addresses in my browser's address bar, instead of going through the main page.
- My Final Edits removed it entirely. First, he claimed it was natter and sent a natter PM, while also calling my edit a Justifying Edit on the edit history page. I informed him that it wasn't natter (specifically, that it wasn't a discussion, but something relevant), and he replied that due to how it was formatted, it looked like it might lead to natter. I replied that he should've just edited the entry to change the format, with him replying, "Why should I, or anyone else, fix the mistakes made by those who could just fix them themselves?", and that deleting it solely to force me to re-add it in a different format was "a penalty for having added the information incorrectly." (I'll admit it was a justifying edit, but of the second sort mentioned at the bottom of the Justifying Edit page, "simply adding more contextual information that was omitted from the original entry but still establishes the example as having a clear relation to the trope"; the page says to "just try to integrate the information into the original entry in such a way that it appears the example was written by a single person. Remember that editing examples is encouraged." It does not say to delete it and tell the original poster to add it again themself.)
- I re-added it, formatted as part of the original entry, like the Justifying Edit page says to do in this situation.
- Shaoken removed it again, specifically because it's a Justifying Edit. He apparently didn't read the bottom of the Justifying Edit page, and figured that any JE of any sort whatsoever has to be removed.
- When I went to add additional information to an unrelated page (specifically, to add ", with no weapons or items," to the Marathon Level entry on Izuna: Legend of the Unemployed Ninja, after "back to level 1"), I saw that I had my editing privileges suspended.
- I checked the Invincibility Power-Up page's edit history, and saw that Shaoken had removed it. I sent him a PM informing him of the two types of Justifying Edit, and that in the case of the second type, the page says not to delete it, but instead to reformat it as part of the entry. I may have worded it in a way that some people might see as hostile, or I may not. I can't remember, and I can't check at the moment because someone disabled my ability to send PMs.
So, in short, I posted something in the wrong format. One troper removed it entirely and told me to post it again instead of formatting it correctly, sending a natter PM and claiming it was a Justifying Edit to excuse himself doing so (despite the Justifying Edit page saying to edit it instead of deleting it, at least for this type of JE). I re-added it in the correct format, and now some other guy removed it again, using its status as a Justifying Edit as an excuse, despite it being formatted correctly and being allowed to remain according to the policies described on Justifying Edit page. What gives?
edited 20th Jan '14 1:26:16 PM by OmegaMetroid
It's not the format that matters, it's the Edit War over it. Also, what you posted was correctly removed for being Natter and speculation, regardless of whether it's in the example or a bullet beneath it. Speculation goes in Fridge or Headscratchers pages, not the main article, and a Justifying Edit is not merely supposed to be tacked onto the end of the example.
More importantly, the edit reason you provided when you added it back was rude to the point of belligerence, which is not something that we tolerate.
When notified of the edit suspension, you should have come here immediately, not continue to argue the point via private messages, thus the PM suspension.
edited 20th Jan '14 1:40:05 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Fine, although I don't really consider it speculation due to the way the game shows your sprite overlapping enemies that aren't immediately destroyed upon collision. It displays your ship's sprite overlaid on top of the enemy's sprite, which implies flying "above" the level from the point of view of the player. Going by the sprites themselves, it's just as much a speculation as saying that Mario squishes enemies when he Goomba Stomps them, at least in my opinion.
Edit: Here's
◊ a screenshot of what I'm talking about.
edited 20th Jan '14 2:02:03 PM by OmegaMetroid
Is it relevant to the example? Does it make the example factually incorrect? If any of these are the case, see Repair Dont Respond. If it's just adding additional information that doesn't do anything to clarify the example, then it's best to leave well enough alone.
Speculation about how a trope might be explained isn't really pertinent in most cases.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"- I already said "Fine", meaning I won't add it back in again.
- I still don't see it as speculation, since the most logical explanation for what the game shows happening is indeed that your ship is getting closer to the screen.
edited 20th Jan '14 2:10:20 PM by OmegaMetroid
But unless it's actually in-game, then "most logical explanation" is you speculating, not facts. That's the distinction I'm trying to make. Again, though, you're concerned about the example. I'm concerned about your rudeness.
Edit: If you see a conflict like that occur, work it out with the other troper(s) in a polite way. The wiki isn't about who can get their opinion to win.
edited 20th Jan '14 2:12:45 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Okay, I'll try to be more polite, then, and to remember to wait a while until I calm down before responding to things that annoy me. Sorry about that.
But I still want to know why you think my claim that it's the most logical explanation is speculation. I'm not claiming that it's what happens, but rather, simply that it's the most logical explanation for your sprite getting larger and you being unable to attack enemies. If saying that it's the most logical explanation is speculation, what other explanation would be logical enough to be another contender for "most logical"? (Note: I explicitly used the words "most logical explanation" because the game in question would happily use other explanations such as your ship inflating or that it's literally caused by the ship's sprite growing. I didn't say it was the correct explanation, I merely stated that the most logical one is that it's moving closer to the player's viewpoint.) If my PMs have been re-enabled, we could continue this there, because I really would like to know what other explanation is logical enough to contend with the one I posted.
edited 20th Jan '14 2:25:34 PM by OmegaMetroid
Tropes don't require justification. They exist, self evident.
I'll lift your suspensions but I want you to work on your understanding of this concept.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"In regards to my suspension, I agree that in this case it wasn't a particularly justified edit and thus natter, something I will try to avoid in the future.
Can you clarify what I failed to do in regards to Example Indentation however?
Adding additional items to an example by increasing the bullet level.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I failed to add a bullet point for an example or I added an unnecessary one?
That article has a general problem with Natter and Example Indentation; I'm not surprised you felt the desire to join in. Please read those policy articles for examples of usage.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I agree, it's a rather messy page, hence my confusion at what I did differently. I see now, should have tidied up the entry before including any necessary edits (which in retrospect, mine weren't).
Apologies for the lapse into natter and bad formatting. Been troping for three years and think I've accidentally picked up some bad habits along the way, definitely need to go back and RTFM again. Sorry for causing this hassle with rookie mistakes.
Right, much better. For your penance, please help clean up the article. Suspension lifted.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Shall perform cleanup as soon as possible (still reading flagged as suspended). I can see quite a few things that need cleanup in the article, let me know if I overlooked anything and will gladly go back to bring it up to snuff.

Ah, fair play, it's changed now to a more standard password, since I did try to have it as "Fine, I'll change it to a more polite password. :P" which must have been broken by escaping it, so I reset it when it didn't allow me to log in. :)
May I not be allowed to edit again? :)
JT.