Thread:Monolith616/@comment-10473115-20170303000811/@comment-10473115-20170307013756

I decided to not give my opinions about naming of unnamed at least for a while partly because I want to retain some kind neutral status in this discussion and partly because I'm not sure what would be best naming policy for those unnamed characters.

First an official admin review of your dispute: I noticed no ill will at your discussions on policy thread, here or in Talk:Bucky's mother (Earth-616). Discussion was started and participated and your last dispute on move tags could be used as an example of consensus by editing. There were still few problematic points which I like to point out: Shabook's first propose to delete was done 8 minutes after the creation of the page by Monolith. That would have warranted an explanation to the talk page, now Monolith had to start it and even after admin asking, Shabook didn't address what policy the page was violating until many months later. That's not a big problem because the deletion tag was removed without an opposition which meant that Shabook had accepted it. Maybe a little unpolite to disappear from the discussion without acknowledging the current consensus. Then Shabook added a move tag a little while ago. That's not against any rules but a notification to a talk page would have been good because opposition should have been expected from the previous discussions. Finally, Shabook raised a question on a policy thread which is to be applauded because our naming conventions couldn't help on the situation and it would help us to get a real policy for those page names.

Okay, and now my personal view without any admin talk. We could use more of this kind mediator stuff but unfortunately we are so small site that it's very hard to find anybody interested, active or neutral enough. I don't know if I validate to that either but did my best. Monolith: I think that it was very good to bring this matter up. We all become frustrated at some time or another. I didn't find any objections about your behaviour but you have to accept the fact that in wikis most persistent will usually win disputes. It could be frustrating but everything is always open up to change by nature so if somebody comes back after few months, it has to accepted. I can still very well feel your pain as I've felt it many times in here. For me it's usually over our desire to keep the things as they were without even thinking otherwise or our seemingly resistance over to written rules. One editor's resistance have never bothered me, I have argued with Shabook many times, sometimes agreeing and sometimes disagreeing. I still have always considered that as a normal way at wikis, in our site we sometimes fear too much about an honest debate. And to Shabook: I almost responded to you a few days ago because your another disagreement with LoveWaffle. I restrained then because Spencer and especially Annabell gave so good answers. I already criticised you mildly on the official part and want you to think is there any basis for you to reconsider your behaviour. I examined your dispute with LoveWaffle and found reason for it from both of you. I don't think that's coincidence that you are at the center of it again. I'm not sure what is it but please, read Annabell's post one more time. I think that was a bold and great post.