User talk:Chumchumlol

File:Information.svg Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to :Rudy Gobert has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

{{clear}}

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [{{User:ClueBot NG/Warnings/FPReport|3402353}} report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Rudy Gobert was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rudy+Gobert&diff=844734990&oldid=844474546 changed] by Chumchumlol (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.968707 on 2018-06-06T20:03:45+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 20:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

:I apolgoize. At the time I had discovered this new software called "Grammarly" Me being 11 years old, I assumed grammar wasn't too complex and automatically assumed a virtual assistant such as Grammarly would be 100% accurate in fixing any mistakes made to the article. It was very delusional of me. but you have to remember that I didn't know any better. I wanted to abuse it on Hawaii Five-O's wikipedia article which was a show I had heard about from a Jimmy Kimmel Live! This episode had Jimmy Kimmel's cousin interviewing many people asking people what superheros they knew and one of the participants said "Hawaii Five-O". Me at the time believing it was absolutely hilarious, I thought this would be the perfect article to run the Grammarly on. I have learned and I now understand the frequent mistakes virtual assistants make because they are not always perfect. I apologize on behalf of my past childishness.

:Sincerely,

:Chumchumlol Chumchumlol (talk) 03:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Information orange.svg Please refrain from making vindictive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at :Gender. Your edits appear to be goated and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Beccaynr (talk) 05:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on :Gender. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template.

File:Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Please do not call good faith edits vandalism, as you did in your edit summary when you reverted an edit. You also say go to the talk page, but you have not gone to the talk page either. I will not be editing the page anymore, but you may be subject to an edit war block if you continue to revert when other people disagree with your edits and revert. Thank you. Yoshi24517 (mobile) (talk) (Very Busy) 04:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ca ^{talk to me!} 08:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.Dronebogus (talk) 20:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

{{unblock reviewed|reason=I’m appealing my indefinite block by Drmies on May 19, 2025, for "not here to build an encyclopedia" (WP:NOTHERE). I believe this block may have been based on a misunderstanding of my intentions. On "Talk:Conversion therapy," I proposed a sourced edit (Bieber et al., 1962, DOI:10.1097/00005053-196211000-00008) to add historical context, aiming to align with WP:NPOV and WP:V. During this process, I encountered challenges: Sumanuil edited my user page, removing my "red/white/blue" pronouns and noting they were "childish" ([diff]), which I felt was a breach of WP:CIVIL. Dronebogus described my contributions as "sealioning" ([diff]) and filed an ANI report at 20:18 UTC, which I believe skipped the collaborative steps in WP:DR and didn’t fully assume good faith per WP:AGF. Drmies blocked me at 21:24 UTC, stating I was "wasting time" and my writings were "inscrutable."

I want to clarify that my goal was to contribute constructively: my proposal followed WP:V and WP:NPOV, my user page expression was within WP:USERPAGE guidelines, and my edit summaries (e.g., "Hiroshima… baby gravy") were meant to be expressive, not disruptive, per WP:CIVIL. I was preparing an ANI report to address these concerns, which I thought was appropriate under WP:DR. I also noticed a possible inconsistency—my conservative pronouns seemed to draw scrutiny, while other expressions (e.g., trans flags) did not, which felt unfair.

I’d like a chance to contribute positively to Wikipedia, and I’m happy to use more neutral edit summaries going forward to avoid any misunderstandings. I kindly request this block be lifted so I can continue building the encyclopedia collaboratively. Chumchumlol (talk) 04:19, 1 June 2025 (UTC)|decline=In reviewing your edits; There is no such thing as "bias-free", as all sources of information have biases. Sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge the sources for themselves when determining what they think about a topic. You are free to read an article and disagree with everything presented; we don't claim it's the truth, see WP:TRUTH. We try to present information with a neutral point of view, which is not the same as bias. I find most of your edit summaries tinged with disingenuiousness; "juvenile" isn't a bad way to describe, either(as {{u|Dronebogus}} did below). You claimed in 2023 to be 11 years old, which would mean that you were six years old when you made your first edit in 2018, I doubt that very much. I don't know many youths who have [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gender&diff=prev&oldid=1172453839 "studied gender for years now"].

You can believe whatever it is you believe, but truth warriors usually have a hard time here. Trying to push what someone deems the truth is indeed being NOTHERE, so {{u|Drmies}} was absolutely correct with the block. I see no pathway to unblocking you without a topic ban from the contentious topic area of gender issues. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)}}

Note: I’ve updated this request to clarify my tone and intent, aiming to be more constructive. Thank you for understanding. Chumchumlol (talk) 04:23, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

• Claiming to use “red/white/blue” as pronouns is inherently juvenile because those are not pronouns, they’re adjectives. There is no way to interpret that besides trying to delegitimize and mock trans people by implying nonstandard pronouns are as nonsensical as using random words as pronouns. You do not actually want to be addressed using these so-called “pronouns”, and I have no idea how you would even use them as such in a sentence. Stop playing the victim, hiding your true intent, and making false equivalences to universally recognized symbols like the transgender pride flag. Otherwise you will stay blocked. Dronebogus (talk) 08:40, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:*Indeed, if you are unable to be respectful of all humans here regardless of gender due to your views, this is the wrong place for you. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

{{unblock reviewed |1=Thank you, 331dot and Dronebogus, for your feedback. I’d like to clarify my intentions to address your concerns. I fully agree with Wikipedia’s goal of presenting neutrality for readers to evaluate, per WP:NPOV, not asserting a universal “truth” (WP:TRUTH). My proposal on "Talk:Conversion therapy" (Bieber et al., 1962, DOI:10.1097/00005053-196211000-00008) aimed to add historical context for this purpose, letting readers decide for themselves, which I believe aligns with Wikipedia’s mission. I’d also like to correct a misunderstanding about my age: I was 11 in 2018, not 2023, as I may have misstated earlier. I understand my “red/white/blue” pronouns have caused concern, especially for Dronebogus. These pronouns are my personal expression of my patriotic gender identity under WP:USERPAGE and are deeply tied to my well-being. I experience gender dysphoria unless I’m referred to as red/white/blue, as these terms affirm my identity and help me feel comfortable in my own skin. I’m fully okay with being addressed this way—it’s a practical and meaningful part of my identity, not a mockery or attempt to delegitimize trans identities, though it feels like I've been repeatedly delegitimized by DroneBogus for identifying as such. I feel that labeling them as “nonsensical” or a “mockery” overlooks the genuine dysphoria I experience and how these pronouns alleviate it. My comparison to trans flags was only to note that both are identity expressions, but I see how that might have been unclear, especially since one is rooted in dysphoria while the other was an analogy, and I’ll avoid such comparisons moving forward. I also take responsibility for my edit summaries (e.g., “Hiroshima… baby gravy”) being seen as juvenile. They were meant to be lighthearted and reflect my feelings about the edit in a fun way, but I'm now committed to using neutral summaries moving forward. My goal has always been to contribute constructively, and I’m not here to disrespect anyone. My views on gender don’t change my commitment to WP:NPOV and respectful collaboration. If a topic ban from gender issues is needed to return, I’m willing to accept that to show my good faith, though I’d appreciate clarity on how my contributions were disruptive. I also hope the challenges I faced—Sumanuil’s user page edit ([diff]) and Dronebogus’s “sealioning” ([diff])—can be reviewed for WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF concerns. Thank you for considering my request. Chumchumlol (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2025 (UTC) |decline = Obvious trolling is obvious. There's no reasonable possibility you'll be unblocked for the foreseeable future. I suggest waiting until you are significantly more mature, and at least two years in any case. You'll want to address your obvious trolling at that time. I'm going to revoke talk page access as suggested below. Expect to lose access to UTRS, too, if you don't follow the advice I'm offering you here. Yamla (talk) 16:07, 1 June 2025 (UTC)}}

This request doesn't pass the straight face test and I recommend that this be declined by the next reviewer. Your claimed gender dysphoria is just disruption to make a point and deeply offensive. Your claim about your age makes no sense as your post in 2023 made no reference to referring to your age in 2018. If you don't want to be honest about your age, that's fine, I don't want to know your specific age, but at least be honest that you aren't being honest about it. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

: Note: I understand what you are saying, and you're absolutely right, after further review, I was not 11 in 2018, I was 9. I'm being truthfully 100% honest about my age, now I'm 16, though I concede, I may have not have fully explained that properly back in 2023. It's not disruption, it's just how I feel, I'm sorry if it comes off as offensive to you in any way. Chumchumlol 14:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

::Chumchumlol, I wouldn't be surprised if the next admin declines the request and revokes your access to this talk page, because now you're just trolling, with the pronoun shit. No need to ping me if you respond. Drmies (talk) 14:59, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:::I'm getting Litter boxes in schools hoax vibes here. 331dot (talk) 15:00, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

::::I’m sure they’ll say they sexually identify as an attack helicopter next. Dronebogus (talk) 15:55, 1 June 2025 (UTC)