| Revision as of 15:18, 11 September 2023 editDlthewave (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers21,588 edits →Walls of text and WP:SYNTH: new sectionTags: Reverted 2017 wikitext editor← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:53, 11 September 2023 edit undoZilch-nada (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,493 edits →Walls of text and WP:SYNTH: ReplyTags: Reverted ReplyNext edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| I noticed that you've written a great deal at ] and ], many thousands of bytes in fact. Since your views have gained very little traction with fellow editors, I would ask that you read the ] essay and consider ]. These excessively long comments can easily cross the line into disruptive editing. | I noticed that you've written a great deal at ] and ], many thousands of bytes in fact. Since your views have gained very little traction with fellow editors, I would ask that you read the ] essay and consider ]. These excessively long comments can easily cross the line into disruptive editing. | ||
| I would also remind you that we write articles based on what reliable sources say about the topic. You seem to be bringing tangentially-related sources into the mix and using them to argue against the sources that directly address the topic; this is called ] and is not allowed. You will have a much stronger case for your desired changes if you reference the sources used in these articles and only bring in additional sources if they are directly related to the topic. –] ] 15:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC) | I would also remind you that we write articles based on what reliable sources say about the topic. You seem to be bringing tangentially-related sources into the mix and using them to argue against the sources that directly address the topic; this is called ] and is not allowed. You will have a much stronger case for your desired changes if you reference the sources used in these articles and only bring in additional sources if they are directly related to the topic. –] ] 15:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
| :With the Reverse Racism talk page, I ''have'' dropped the stick for now, and intend to bring it to a noticeboard, because it is my opinion that consensus on that article consists of a small number of editors who have been editing it for up to six years. I accept that there is consensus against me in the talk page; I just think it is a very narrow consensus, and so aim to widen the discussion. | |||
| :With the Gender-critical feminism talk, it is just not true that my "views have gained very little traction with fellow editors". | |||
| :"against the sources that directly address the topic"; I couldn't disagree more with this, as my agruments are mostly based on how the ''current wording'' is '''not''' supported by the current sources that link to it. The additional sources I refer to, I very much believe, address the wording much more - i.e., ''they'' "directly address the topic." ] (]) 15:53, 11 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:53, 11 September 2023
Please don't move pages before getting agreement
See WP:RMUM. Also note you seem to be confusing "Christian Identity" (upper case I) with "Christian identity". Doug Weller talk 20:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Reminder that you have CT alerts for Abortion, American politics and gender
Feel free to delete this. It's so it shows up clearly in your talk page history as I'd forgotten which ones I'd given you. Doug Weller talk 07:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
July 2023
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to List of LGBT awareness periods, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Raladic (talk) 04:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Raladic, I left my response on the talk page. I do not see how my edit was disruptive, nor how it warrants a response in my own talk page. Zilch-nada (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- It is a standard courtesy when reverting edits to let editors know on their talk page about having been reverted.
- You are free to remove any content from your WP:TALK page and do not need to keep it here. (It will still be in the page history).
- I replied on the article talk page to your comment. Raladic (talk) 14:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Far-left
I went ahead and archived that old talk page section; it had veered so far off the rails that it would be more efficient to start a new thread than to resurrect that one. If you choose to do so, please be more civil and hold the "or get out" sort of comments; thanks. VQuakr (talk) 18:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I said get "X nonsense out of here"; I resorted to no personal attacks, only that to of his argument. Aside from that, I agree that the talk has went completely off-topic, so thanks. Zilch-nada (talk) 18:54, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I never said anything about a personal attack. Civility goes beyond merely avoiding personal attacks. VQuakr (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't dispute that. I was being straight to the point in disputing an argument. That could be interpreted as the virtue of "boldness" on Misplaced Pages. I will be civil next time, but "civility" is, of course, subjective. Zilch-nada (talk) 19:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Boldness is about not needing anyone's permission to make wise improvements to the 'pedia, not about being terse on talk pages. Sounds good. There's some general advice at WP:AVOIDUNCIVIL. Happy editing! VQuakr (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't dispute that. I was being straight to the point in disputing an argument. That could be interpreted as the virtue of "boldness" on Misplaced Pages. I will be civil next time, but "civility" is, of course, subjective. Zilch-nada (talk) 19:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I never said anything about a personal attack. Civility goes beyond merely avoiding personal attacks. VQuakr (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Walls of text and WP:SYNTH
I noticed that you've written a great deal at Talk:Gender-critical feminism and Talk:Reverse racism, many thousands of bytes in fact. Since your views have gained very little traction with fellow editors, I would ask that you read the WP:Wall of text essay and consider dropping the stick. These excessively long comments can easily cross the line into disruptive editing. I would also remind you that we write articles based on what reliable sources say about the topic. You seem to be bringing tangentially-related sources into the mix and using them to argue against the sources that directly address the topic; this is called WP:SYNTH and is not allowed. You will have a much stronger case for your desired changes if you reference the sources used in these articles and only bring in additional sources if they are directly related to the topic. –dlthewave ☎ 15:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- With the Reverse Racism talk page, I have dropped the stick for now, and intend to bring it to a noticeboard, because it is my opinion that consensus on that article consists of a small number of editors who have been editing it for up to six years. I accept that there is consensus against me in the talk page; I just think it is a very narrow consensus, and so aim to widen the discussion.
- With the Gender-critical feminism talk, it is just not true that my "views have gained very little traction with fellow editors".
- "against the sources that directly address the topic"; I couldn't disagree more with this, as my agruments are mostly based on how the current wording is not supported by the current sources that link to it. The additional sources I refer to, I very much believe, address the wording much more - i.e., they "directly address the topic." Zilch-nada (talk) 15:53, 11 September 2023 (UTC)