Revision as of 15:57, 17 September 2023 editAbiquiúBoy (talk | contribs)187 edits →ARE comment: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:12, 17 September 2023 edit undoFormalDude (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,511 edits →Introduction to contentious topics: new sectionTags: contentious topics alert New topicNext edit → | ||
Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
::Asking a question is giving the benefit of the doubt. I didn't say "You purposefully attacked me". I simply asked what they meant by it. ––] ] 15:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | ::Asking a question is giving the benefit of the doubt. I didn't say "You purposefully attacked me". I simply asked what they meant by it. ––] ] 15:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
:::Just came off as a little passive aggressive, especially in the context of something as heated as admin notices ] (]) 15:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | :::Just came off as a little passive aggressive, especially in the context of something as heated as admin notices ] (]) 15:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
== Introduction to contentious topics == | |||
{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to '''post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people''', a topic designated as ''']'''. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>. | |||
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, Misplaced Pages’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Misplaced Pages administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project. | |||
Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully</strong> and <strong>constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and: | |||
*adhere to the purposes of Misplaced Pages; | |||
*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. | |||
<p>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 ] or you may learn more about this contentious topic ]. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. </p>}}<!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert/first --> | |||
] You have recently made edits related to ] and ]. This is a standard message to inform you that ] and ] is a designated contentious topic. This message <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see ]. <!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert --><br> | |||
] You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see ]. <!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert --> ––] ] 16:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:12, 17 September 2023
|
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
PragerU
Greetings! You thanked me for my edit on PragerU, so you must see the value of it. You should join the discussion, which is dominated by some angry leftist activist who speaks of ”leftism bringing truth”. We need a more objective and fair discussion. Trakking (talk) 13:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Evening!
- I made an edit which I believe works well for not only your edit, but also theirs. I did laugh when I saw that editor claim that 'republicans are anti truth so leftism is truth' AbiquiúBoy (talk) 13:56, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- The thing is, I could not find any historians or political scientists among the critics at all! And if there aren’t, the information is false and should be removed. Could you do a double-check on them so we’re being correct? Trakking (talk) 14:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- You do this by clicking on the links and then on the author in the articles, where it says ”this person is a journalist” etc. Or by googling their names and looking up their credentials. Trakking (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! While I do know how to look at the authors in articles, what I was struggling with was finding the right links for that entire paragraph in the first place. Maybe the criticism sub article has better links. I'll have a look👍🏻 AbiquiúBoy (talk) 14:05, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- I did review it and there were 2 historians or political scientists (Kevin Kruse and Paul Gottfried) so the current compromise edit seems to be the best choice AbiquiúBoy (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Good find. Gottfried is a historian—I forgot. The other guy seems to be one as well. But there’s no political scientist, then. Could you change the text to read ”journalists, sociologists and historians”? Thank you. Trakking (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- You do this by clicking on the links and then on the author in the articles, where it says ”this person is a journalist” etc. Or by googling their names and looking up their credentials. Trakking (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- The thing is, I could not find any historians or political scientists among the critics at all! And if there aren’t, the information is false and should be removed. Could you do a double-check on them so we’re being correct? Trakking (talk) 14:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- The reason I made that edit for the fascism article was because, like i mentioned, most people right-of-centre hold the same beliefs in social hierarchy, but it's fascism's rigorous and appalling implementation of it which makes fascism 'fascism'. Maybe we could reach a compromise on that by merging the societal implementation parts which you had mentioned? AbiquiúBoy (talk) 13:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- My intuition was right about that statement being wrong. Historians and political scientists tend to be Rightists. Journalists and sociologists, on the other hand, are often leftists. Fun fact: one of the two historians cited, Paul Gottfried, is in fact an adherent of paleoconservatism, which is a very traditionalist form of conservatism. Trakking (talk) 19:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Historian, ye sure might be, but political scientists? I think those are more of the liberal bent.
- Journos and sociologists ye sure.
- Thing is, nobody who reads the article can reasonably be expected to get that nuance. What they interpret to be the difference is that journos and sociologists are more 'biased' (regardless of affiliation) and more of a subjective source whilst historians are thought of as a way stronger and more objective source AbiquiúBoy (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- My intuition was right about that statement being wrong. Historians and political scientists tend to be Rightists. Journalists and sociologists, on the other hand, are often leftists. Fun fact: one of the two historians cited, Paul Gottfried, is in fact an adherent of paleoconservatism, which is a very traditionalist form of conservatism. Trakking (talk) 19:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
A lengthy welcome
Hi AbiquiúBoy. Welcome to Misplaced Pages. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Misplaced Pages. I hope you find it useful.
Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Misplaced Pages: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Misplaced Pages by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily in collaboration.
Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Misplaced Pages's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.
If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Misplaced Pages's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Misplaced Pages and the neutrality required in articles.
Some topic areas within Misplaced Pages have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.
If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.
If you find yourself in a disagreement with another editor, it's best to discuss the matter on the relevant talk page.
I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Hipal (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to look out for a new editor! AbiquiúBoy (talk) 16:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
If you're going to try to edit in areas under sanctions, please tread carefully. Comments like could be seen as disruptive. --Hipal (talk) 18:33, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Point taken AbiquiúBoy (talk) 18:42, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
ARE comment
Just so you know, you're not supposed to reply directly in someone's section at ARE, as you did here and here. You have to add your own subsection titled "Statement by AbiquiúBoy". I suggest you remove or move your comments–if you don't a clerk will do it for you.
As for your reply to me, it is not bad faith to ask a question. It was a reasonable question given I was literally being name-called. And please do not call me "lad". ––FormalDude (talk) 15:31, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- AbiquiúBoy, I was going to say the same thing. ARE is a place where where replies aren't supposed to be nested. Springee (talk) 15:46, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- 👍🏼I'll take that into consideration from now on thank you AbiquiúBoy (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Oh ok, didn't know that.
- It seems a lot like bad faith because ForumDude and FormalDude are so similar as to deserve the benefit of the doubt.
- Sorry if I offended you by referring to you as 'lad', it's just a habit I have on other websites
- AbiquiúBoy (talk) 15:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Asking a question is giving the benefit of the doubt. I didn't say "You purposefully attacked me". I simply asked what they meant by it. ––FormalDude (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Just came off as a little passive aggressive, especially in the context of something as heated as admin notices AbiquiúBoy (talk) 15:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Asking a question is giving the benefit of the doubt. I didn't say "You purposefully attacked me". I simply asked what they meant by it. ––FormalDude (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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, Misplaced Pages’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages;
- 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 {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
You have recently made edits related to pseudoscience and fringe science. This is a standard message to inform you that pseudoscience and fringe science is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Misplaced Pages:Contentious topics.
You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Misplaced Pages:Contentious topics. ––FormalDude (talk) 16:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC)