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
Answering ping re: ~WDS
We do not delete tropes unless if there's proof that they cannot be saved. IIRC, you were asking for tropes that are basically two descriptors combined to be mass purged? No, that's not how it works.
I have read through my messages and the issues they detail, and I now understand what I was doing wrong, particularly with the indentation/bulleting issues. I think I just had trouble grasping it previously because there were a lot of examples of both the correct and incorrect kinds of formatting.
Ah, thanks Septimus. Might just be used to You Tube. I apologize for getting all fired up like that.
I've personally never seen The Nutcracker and the Four Realms so I'm not exactly capable of explaining anything for that matter. The reason why I added it was because it is quite literally the first trope listed under the "The Nutcracker and the Four Realms contains examples of:" on the main page with the following entry:
- Action Girl: Clara and Mother Ginger are quite tough fighters in the final battle.
Which I guess more or less tells the story, since an action girl is basically just a female character who's a capable fighter. I'm not sure why I didn't just have it say something like "Action Girl: In the final battle, Clara/Mother Ginger shows she's quite a tough fighter" on the character page. In hindsight I probably should've just put the 2 % symbols at the start of the line to make it invisible and just let someone else who can better explain it do the rest.
Though to do what was asked of me I could for instance write an Action Girl example for say Mikasa Ackerman in my own words since I've actually seen Attack on Titan.
- Action Girl: Mikasa is easily among one of the better fighters, being able to take down multiple titans on her own with relative ease on multiple occasions.
Berrenta: Ummm whut? I didn't ask about the suggested pruning of pages. I asked about getting my editing privileges back. Totally unrelated concerns.
Seriously. I got banned because people does not like the truth. Sorry for sounding so rude. But is genuinely annoying.
Thank you Septimus.
I've learned my lesson on changing images, and will not do it again.
Saigon by Heritage 🇻🇳 Seattle by Citizenship 🇺🇸I want to apologize again for the minor edit war with Lancelot 07, he deleted the page image and was very rude about it so I put it back in again and explained the reason why I chose it as a page image, I didn't intend to start the edit war I just shared my reasoning. Also thank you Septimus, I will check out the thread. Although I'm wondering if I'll be there till my suspension is over or will there be a set amount of time until my suspension will be lifted?
Edited by WolfofBlades on Aug 27th 2021 at 11:47:36 PM
Everything Sucks Forever~Pren and ~Arcane Azmadi: I'll lift the suspensions, but I'll warn you that if there is yet another instance of improper indentation/edit warring, there won't be any more.
~Cauchy Rerun When, ~Johnny_Joestar and ~magnumtropus: I'll lift the suspension.
~Marauder09: Yes, that's pretty much it. Generally, you cannot presume that someone reading an example is even cursorily familiar with the plot. Since it seems like we have an understanding, I'll lift the suspension.
~WDS: Not totally unrelated - if after being suspended you go to a different part of the website and make trouble, folks will be wary of lifting the first suspension.
~Warminadore: A lot of people seem to disagree with your characterization of Severus Snape. To say nothing that your grammar is pretty shoddy and some of your additions e.g this one
~its_stephprime: Lifted the suspension, see that it doesn't happen again.
~Wolfof Blades: There is no set time, basically until the grammar is up to par. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I didn't mean to come across as confrontational but I definitely get why I did. I also didn't think that ranting about how certain movies are all placed under a 'woke' umbrella would be too out of place in a topic about Diversity and Representation in Media, but I get it now.
None of what I write is a lie going by characterization. That sounds harsh is another thing. I am guided by the Books and the word of God.
I kind of want to apologize in the Metroid thread for my rants. I'm mostly just irked by the idea that sexism is somehow Other M's biggest writing sin, though that's probably because it's the most visible maybe?
Here's my explanation for avoiding an edit war:
- An edit war begins when I change an edit of mine modified or removed by another troper back as it was when I added it, or when a troper changes an edit of theirs I reverted back as it was when they changed it before. The third edit will always be the threshold, regardless of the troper who made it. In my case, I was responsible for the first and third edits.
- An edit war will lead to suspension for all the parties involved, regardless if they intended it or not. Given my case, in which my edits spanned a months apart, the time when the edits took place are mo excuse either.
- If an edit war is about to start, I should address the issue with one of the following communication systems on the wiki, which I did not do in my case:
- The article's Discussion page. In this case, I must at least leave an edit with a reason mentioning the post that I added to the Discussion page, so that others can find the post more easily.
- A private message to the troper with whom I'd be about to begin the incoming edit war, clarifying to them so that we will not start it. This case works best if there's only one other troper involved in the situation.
- Ask The Tropers or the forums in Trope Talk (if the article in question is about a trope) and Wiki Talk (if the article is about anything other than a trope) threads. These cases are for situations with multiple users.
- Use the "Report Page" button in the sidebar to send a message to the staff. This case should only be done if a troper is constantly vandalizing a specific article or ignoring any messages that I sent to them about the issue.
- While I did not do this either in my case, I should not simply leave an edit reason to avoid an edit war. I can use it at the same time as any of the communication systems above, but never as a sole measure. Besides, I also have to assure that it's civil, since making it rude will lead to a suspension.
- Exceptions to the policy on edit wars can be made if the editors involved are only trying to make an article compliant with other wiki policies, but reverting anyone's work will not make things better even if it's correct. It's always best to send a message to the staff so that they can deal with such situation.
Is this acceptable to lift my suspension?
Edited by Inky100 on Aug 29th 2021 at 12:29:33 PM
Waiting to have my head disfigured and mounted on a wall.Septimus: What in the nine circles of Hell makes you think I intend to cause trouble?
I saw I was suspended for something but I don’t know what. I’ve been doing my absolute best to avoid causing arguments, flame wars, I’ve been apologizing whenever I felt like I’ve gone too close to them, but if you feel I screwed up, I’m sorry.
I did notice as well your regulation against VPN’s, which I had installed on my tablet due to security concerns unrelated to the site and my absent minded using it here. If that’s the case I immediately apologize for that and will ensure it’s turned off when on the site.
Edited by Beatman1 on Aug 28th 2021 at 10:13:11 AM
So what did I do? I suck at writing and I doubt that would change so is if that's the problem is there a way that I could get it looked at before putting it up.
Edited by Chrismower on Aug 28th 2021 at 8:44:25 AM
Alright understood but how can I put it up to par? Also how will you guys know when it's up to par?
Everything Sucks Forever~Inky100: That seems acceptable; I'll lift the suspension.
~WDS: Because thread+edit suspension indicates a pattern of bad editing practices, and we've seen a number of people in the past who upon being edit suspended went to the fora and started trouble there. Thus we like to have all problems cleared up before lifting the suspension.
~Beatman1: No, it was Complaining About Shows You Don't Like, essentially. Again. We don't give fourth chances for repeat offenders, so I think we are done with you.
~Chrismower: Well, yeah, your writing isn't good enough, as your post here (a superfluous "is" and the run-on sentence) demonstrate. If it can't improve then we can't let you edit, sorry.
~Wolfof Blades: Basically, when you have a run of edit requests that folks don't have to correct. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I would like to be allowed to post again, if only to propose some edits. I understand that I got suspended because I made inflammatory posts that tended to hijack certain threads. I really hope I've mellowed out enough by now.
![]()
Well, I’m going to apologize and take the ban then. Might be for the best.
Fine then is it alright if I just keep things short. Really the only thing I did was try to give reasons for why some song's deserved to be in awesome music. I mean as long as I don't try to write a lot it should be fine, and I only did so because apparently the reason why they were blocked off was because they weren't actual reasons. Even though quite a few that were approved by you guy's had the exact same problem.
Between "ALONES" (6th), "Velonica" (9th), and "chAnge" (12th), all the best Bleach openings are in multiples of three.
TONIGHT, TONIGHT, TONIGHT", the fourth opening and the opening of the Bount arc, was also pretty badass.
The 14th opening, "BLUE", is just awesome. Are all OK with you guys but these,
Index's Theme Music Power-Up, "jellyfish"
, is freaking awesome!
Episode 12 of Index Season 1 gave us a very nice insert song called "Ame"
.
Are not even though they are the exact same thing and half of them are all like this.
Edited by Chrismower on Aug 29th 2021 at 4:10:50 AM
I was curious if I could inquire if I'm permanently blocked from posting in On-Topic Conversations.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.So, that is your side of the story? Well, let me tell you mine.
I sincerely wrote that entry, concerning the matter which bothered me in Inside Out since I watched it — not that I disagree with the movie's message, but that it does not work well when you try it to deliver if from perspective of a school kid interacting with other school kids. I thought I made it clear (and I quote "people familiar with the topic will be less than impressed with the Aesop being delivered via aforementioned scene with little girl"), but apparently, this was not clear enough. The troper who decided to delete my entry completely twisted its meaning, claiming that I merely disagree with the message (I never said that) just because there are some people who won't show you empathy, and that I called ALL kids "cruel" and ALL teens "monsters" (never said that, either). And he had the nerve to accuse me of extrapolating, too. Few other people who spoke basically just thoughtlessly repeated the same thing and threw in some ad hominem remarks for good measure (and I quote "This seems like a cynical editor who didn't like the fact that they didn't show kids being cruel"). So pardon me if I refuse to call it discussion without quotation marks.
Also, the entry was deleted before I got to say anything in the matter. So it's not like I "disregarded" the supposedly ongoing debate, because I was disregarded first. The debate was already over when I got there, no more Clueless Aesop entry. Guilty as charged. So much for "respectful manner" which I read about in the message I received. Say a few lies, totally disregard the man's actual opinion on the matter, then make him into a bad guy because he was not pleased with that. Totally A-OK.
Oh, and in case you don't know, saying lies about me, accusing me of things I haven't done, making up motives (especially mean-spirited) of my actions that would never go through my head, et cetera, are huge Berserk Button for me.
The only reason I decided do re-add that entry is because I wanted to draw attention to the matter again. Apparently, it has Gone Horribly Right (though I didn't expect to be suspended for this right away). Also, I still fail to understand what was exactly "rude" about my comment (especially considering some remarks spoken during the debate, which are apparently not rude at all, at least according to you). I never insulted any of the people who took part in the debate (although I definitely felt insulted by them) and the only thing that may come off as "rude" is that I told them not to tell lies and not make false ad hominem remarks about me. How rude was that, indeed. Rest assured — next time, when someone spits in my face, I'll remember that I should ignore that. And apologize profusely in case I dare to express my displeasure with such behaviour.
If the case of Clueless Aesop entry simply not being allowed under Inside Out movie is basically the only reason I'm suspended, then I can make my solemn promise to give up making any more entries there. And refrain myself from waging Edit War for whatever reasons.
~Charles Phipps: Aye, in light of the number of instances where you were called in for OTC misbehaviour I don't think there will be support for lifting that suspension.
~Der_SpeeDer: The correct way to call attention to something is to head to the discussion to contest the argument, not to readd the example. And to be honest, it's hard to read that example without getting the impression that you disagree/dislike the aesop in question. "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Yes, I've read up on all of them. And after hearing that ignored comments were a big part of the issue here, I'll definitely be responding to any more I might get.