User talk:CSGinger14

Hello! This is a notice that no reminders need to be made about WP:CONTOP, WP:OWN, or WP:ADVOCACY, especially so if you plan to use the words "Please note that", "our policies state", or "guidelines are clear that". With the exception of Contop (thanks for the work you guys do), I do not need someone coming here to hammer home a necessarily biased viewpoint, nor have them present it as routine enforcement a la mode de WP:New pages patrol; I also want to note that if you have the gall to take on the task of policeman for something that personally upset your view of how things should be, you should be prepared to engage in a more complex intellectual exercise than a sentence and a half response to the 4 paragraphs of reasoning your two disinterested replies managed to generate. If you can't be bothered doing that, don't bother posting the message in the first place, your claim clearly isn't serious. Put in some effort yourself if you expect others to.

I've found that many of you enjoy the feeling of laying down the law but can't seem to be bothered to actually read it, which makes for an absolutely terrifying WP:BUREAUCRACY that lacks any real clue what it's shouting about in the first place; remember that a smug, coolheaded counter to anything thrown at you isn't nearly as effective a default strategy when there are entire paragraphs you didn't bother to read that prove you wrong, even more so if you can't manage to admit it after the fact. WP:TLDR is meant to keep conversations concise, not catatonic. You have an obligation to grapple in good faith with the posts you respond to on talk. Feel free to challenge me on why that's invalid, I'll give you a barnstar if your reply includes more than five sentences and an actual counter to my main idea. You lot have managed to scare away a population of newbies the size of the active editor pool with your nonsense, so I figure you've gotta believe you can fill in the gap in their absence. Otherwise go stand in the corner and think about what you've done. In fact, use the time to go add something in the mainspace instead of bothering people for no reason.

Cheers, CSGinger14 (talk) 18:40, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Note: Recently, some editors have raised concerns about the tone of this section. Until I have a chance to make revisions that preserve its style and intention while lightening its effect, I would invite you to read the following section and essay if you'd like a clearer explanation as to why this is present, and why I think that we simultaneously need to take ourselves significantly less seriously, while taking our role on this website much more so:

• User:CSGinger14#Principles I advocate

• User:CSGinger14/Issues I've noticed (please read)#19 April - Updated 27 April

Thanks,

CSGinger14 (talk) 01:11, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

AfD comments

Hi, please put your AfD comments after the last comment, as the AfD discussion is listed chronologically. LibStar (talk) 05:11, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Was about to leave the same comment myself per WP:BOTTOMPOST.

Also, please add new comments after any relists, even if in reply to a previous comment before the relist, you could simply just say that you are replying to X user or agreeing with X ("per X"). This is to avoid confusing readers of the discussion of the chronological order of comments/replies. Thanks, Fork99 (talk) 05:23, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Hi @LibStar and @Fork99. I'm not certain I see anything within WP:BOTTOMPOST that indicates AfD discussions have to follow such structures (excluding relist notices, which I try to adhere to as much as possible), but as a point of courtesy I'll try to be better about that moving forward. Thanks for the note.

Best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 05:53, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Holcim Group on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

SodiumBot (botop|talk|contribs) 17:32, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Invitation to adopt-a-user

Wikipedia ads	file info – #232

Peaceray (talk) 18:47, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Rhymes for Young Ghouls is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Rhymes for Young Ghouls is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ThadeusOfNazereth -- ThadeusOfNazereth (talk) 19:08, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of Rhymes for Young Ghouls is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article Rhymes for Young Ghouls has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ThadeusOfNazereth -- ThadeusOfNazereth (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Wow

Insane AfD, may want to look at this as well. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 17:26, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

@Not-cheesewhisk3rs Thanks for the note. I'll look into this when I have a bit more time. I'm on the cusp of bringing this guy up at arbitration, cause we don't tolerate discrimination here and he nonetheless seems to think he can get away with it because it's an issue of controversy. I'll stand behind you on anything you choose to do in the meantime, feel free to link to this section as evidence. I'll also leave a ping here for @Smallestredboy, who may have something to say about it.

Best,

CSGinger14 (talk) 20:10, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I struggled to say something in the AfD itself as I'm relatively new both to XfD and Wikipedia in general, and I kept trying to assume good faith, but the facts (the subject themself referring to their gender identity and outing as the main concern + the usage of "brother" in sources this user themself cited) made it leave a very bad taste in my mouth, and I had to call it out as everyone else seemed not to.

I completely agree with your point of view in your userpage, CSGinger - the lack of basic empathy in favor of "well technically they may be notable" is quite unsettling. I'm not sure if I'd support a case (while the behavior is problematic, to be sure, it doesn't seem to be an intractable issue... yet), but I am glad to hear others were perturbed by this behavior.

Thank you for the ping. Best, smallest red boy (talk • contribs) 22:23, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

CSGinger14 and @smallestredboy: So, it's been a while. Are either of you interesting in making something useful out of this? If there's anything that has to be done, I can help. However, I don't know what needs to be done. The diff I linked above is an outrageous WP:BLP violation in WP:GENSEX, but alone it's probably not enough for a case. Not sure what else can be done; I'd appreciate your insight, since both of you participated in the discussion whereas I didn't. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 17:14, 29 October 2026 (UTC)

October 2026

• WP:BATTLEGROUND is one of Wikipedia's core policies, and your talk page is in clear violation. It also violates WP:TALKNOTFORUM. I am asking you to voluntarily remove the offending text and to interact with other editors civilly, calmly, and in a spirit of cooperation.

Also see:

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive373#CSGinger14
• User talk:CSGinger14/Archive 2#January 2026
• User talk:CSGinger14/Archive 1#WP:OWNership of articles

There will be no additional warnings --Guy Macon (talk) 16:21, 15 October 2026 (UTC)

@Guy Macon Hey so it’s extremely disrespectful to selectively pick through an experienced editor’s talk page after they engage in a good faith discussion with you to try to scare tactic them into an arbitrary, undefined notion of compliance. I don’t need any additional warnings, and I didn’t need this one.

Feel free to start the ANI section right now. Literally all of your examples have been raised or examined by other editors. I’m entirely aware of the discussions I’ve been a part of in the past, have already had this communicated in a far more clear and intentionally directed manner by other editors, including those at the ANI board, and I really, really don’t appreciate warnings derived from nothing other than a seeming attempt to rehash prior controversy for present goals. If you don’t ever allow editors to grow, then who in god’s name do you actually end up allowing to engage with this platform.

You should seriously reconsider whether this accomplishes what you hope it will, or at the very least whether you’ve communicated what you think that is, other than giving me a talking to. Why is it that you felt the need to boilerplate me to stop me from engaging in talk page behavior that you pulled exclusively from my archive.

CSGinger14 (talk) 16:48, 15 October 2026 (UTC)

Also, for context, I keep it around for reasons that you yourself should be in favor of. None of them look good for me. I come off as a massive prick, and I want it to serve as an example of how that can be the case and the person nonetheless be capable of growth and proper engagement with this site’s operations down the line. Why is it, exactly, that you felt the need to post this message? I’ve never received anything similar from other editors, who have overwhelmingly discouraged me from hiding any ‘offending’ material in favor of a strikethrough.

CSGinger14 (talk) 17:11, 15 October 2026 (UTC)

@Guy Macon, picking out 10 month old diffs and citing TNF for a user talk post that requests contop reminders not be left and inviting editors to discuss policy ("Feel free to challenge me on why that's invalid, I'll give you a barnstar"...) is a substantial overreaction and entirely pointless. your warning serves no purpose other than to provoke this editor, which is a form of baiting. cease and return to editing the encyclopedia normally, thanks ~2026-55913-51 (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Floodgate Entertainment

		Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
		Thank you for your pivotal perspective at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Floodgate Entertainment! BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 15:50, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

@BhikhariInformer Thank you! Apologies for not responding sooner, my attention's been elsewhere. I'm of the mind that we've seemingly sacrificed our interest in detailing the history of companies gobbled up by these immense corporate entities amid their acquisition sprees in favor of keeping things clean and concise. I'd rather we be a little bit more intentional about remembering that these businesses had identities and missions before they became part of something bigger, amid the process of which many lost any distinctive quality they'd once possessed (particularly in the case of Zynga, which seems to have simply made regional branches out of all of them).

CSGinger14 (talk) 23:41, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

glad to see the threads been pulled. sorry you had to go through that csginger. you're a good editor and sometimes our character can cause others to misinterpret our intentions. you haven't vandalised, disrupted anyone else, socked or done anything warranting aggro. you simply take the time to express yourself fully. that shouldn't be punished. good to see the vast majority agrees with that sentiment. (I've no further use for this temp account so I'll just say happy editing 😁) logging out. ~2026-55913-51 (talk) 03:45, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Misuse of user pages by CSGinger14. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:24, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Talk page header notice

Greetings,

May I save a screenshot of your talk page notice? It is a great read. Cordially, Augmented Seventh (talk) 02:42, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Feel free, though I’d appreciate your restricting it to the comment itself, and avoiding/blurring any capture of my username / signature for privacy purposes if you can, particularly if you intend to share it.

Thanks,

CSGinger14 (talk) 02:55, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Noted. Augmented Seventh (talk) 03:11, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of January 23–27, 2026 North American winter storm is under review

Your good article nomination of the article January 23–27, 2026 North American winter storm is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Hurricane Wind and Fire -- Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) 22:04, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Your nomination of January 23–27, 2026 North American winter storm is on hold

Your good article nomination of the article January 23–27, 2026 North American winter storm has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Hurricane Wind and Fire -- Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) 15:32, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

DCWC closing update

Three weeks ago, the 2026 Developing Countries WikiContest came to a close! After three months of competition, we have our winners. OpalYosutebito (submissions) comes in third with 525 points earned from a large series of good articles about pandas. Vestrian24Bio (submissions), with an immense number of submissions relating to cricket, comes in second with 1040 points. And our runner-up from last year makes their way to the top of the podium: Simongraham (submissions) takes gold with 1065 points, coming from another round of good articles about African jumping spiders!

The award for the most countries covered goes, once again, to Simongraham (submissions) who submitted articles under 30 flags! Vestrian24Bio (submissions) tops the chart for the most quality articles (23 good articles). Kisseran (submissions) and OpalYosutebito (submissions) tie for the award for most submissions under a single country; both made 14 submissions related to China. The award for most submissions related to women goes to GreenLipstickLesbian (submissions) with 12 biographies about women. We also have a tie for the most reviews! Both Dragonhawk12 (submissions) and Simongraham (submissions) submitted 23 reviews each for the category!

Multiple DCWC records were also broken! Simongraham (submissions) set the new record for the most total points, with 1100. Vestrian24Bio (submissions) set two inaugural records, earning the contest's first featured and good topics. GreenLipstickLesbian (submissions) submitted 29 In the news entries, 12 more than the previous record.

Among the participants' contributions were six FAs, five FLs, 132 GAs, and a number of DYKs, ITNs, and reviews of every kind—far more than last year! Regardless of your level of participation, every contestant can be proud to have contributed to a major step in countering the systemic bias on Wikipedia. Every year, millions of readers and editors around the globe use Wikipedia to educate themselves and communicate with others about parts of the world that often receive less attention than they deserve. Thank you for participating in the contest and contributing to this effort. The DCWC will return next year, and we look forward to seeing your contributions again! However, before that...

We need your feedback! Join the conversation on the talk page to discuss your reflections on the contest (even if you didn't participate!) and help us make it better.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), Generalissima (talk · contribs), Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) —⁠TechnoSquirrel69 (talk) 04:49, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Great work on Inside CECOT. Viriditas (talk) 20:46, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Appreciation.

Hi, I just wanted to reflect a couple of things back at you since we have clashed a bit recently and I have revised my opinions.

• this is an absolutely awesome edit

• I'm pleased that you have started to learn how to manage your enthusiasm while still passionately arguing for your beliefs.

Please keep it up. You are doing a great job. Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:43, 25 October 2026 (UTC)