| Revision as of 02:18, 9 December 2023 editBootsED (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,326 edits →Please don't say "If Trump is elected in 2024, there'll be no election in 2028": ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:44, 20 December 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 56: | Line 56: | ||
| :: I never proposed putting that statement into the article. I was simply making clear the subtext of the idea that Trump will rule as a dictator.] (]) 01:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC) | :: I never proposed putting that statement into the article. I was simply making clear the subtext of the idea that Trump will rule as a dictator.] (]) 01:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC) | ||
| :::Okay, that's good to hear. But I do think saying that sentence may complicate the discussion or confuse editors as to the substance of the original question. ] (]) 02:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC) | :::Okay, that's good to hear. But I do think saying that sentence may complicate the discussion or confuse editors as to the substance of the original question. ] (]) 02:18, 9 December 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 is a brief 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 --> ––] ] 01:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:44, 20 December 2023
September 2023
Hello, I'm Filmssssssssssss. Misplaced Pages is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 13:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Talk Page Guidelines
Per WP:TPO, editors are generally not to remove other's comments from talk pages. Please be more careful, and consider holding back from commenting or editing when you aren't cooled down. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:37, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- Ironically despite your citation, you are the one who lacks competence at editing an encyclopedia, as you fail to understand or care that an encyclopedia's descriptions of events should reflect the descriptions given in reliable sources not the mere opinions of its editors. Don't lecture me when you don't even understand what the purpose of an encyclopedia is. I only reverted your edit because I thought from "Procedural close" you meant that you had unilaterally closed the discussion. 67.82.74.5 (talk) 17:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- In reading
you are the one who lacks competence at editing an encyclopedia
, I feel compelled to remind you that Misplaced Pages has a very strict policy against personal attacks, readable at WP:NPA. Please redact, strike through (using <s> and </s> at the beginning and end of the intended material you seek to strike), or otherwise take back your comment. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 19:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- In reading
ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruption on Talk:Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign. Thank you. — SamX 17:53, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. When you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, such as at Talk:Reaction video, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button
located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Shadow311 (talk) 15:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices. Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Talk:Reaction video. Here is Misplaced Pages's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Misplaced Pages! Thank you very much! AntiDionysius (talk) 16:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
I’ve not been uncivil. I accused another editor of violating the Misplaced Pages policy that no editor owns an article. Much like you have accused me of violating the Misplaced Pages policy of assuming good faith and maintaining civility. While it may be unpleasant to be accused of violating a policy, just as your accusation is unpleasant to me, it is not uncivil. 67.82.74.5 (talk)
- The accusation of rulebreaking is not the uncivil part;
"it is unclear Sandstein even understands the article topic, has seen a react video, knows any of the controversies or legal issues concerning it, or could even name any prominent react streamer or YouTuber"
isn't very civil though. I suspect you know this, because after I left you the above note about civility, you went back and edited it out. That's fair enough. Please keep it in mind in future. --AntiDionysius (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
- Yes I reconsidered and removed those particular remarks, after your post. Thanks 67.82.74.5 (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
I realize you're passionate about the media's latest coverage of the former US president. But, try & control that passion when in discussions. Less is more. GoodDay (talk) 01:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- I am not interested in the advice of someone like you who is clearly uninterested in following policy, as I pointed out to you repeatedly. And what is worse, you then literally lied in your reply to my RFC stating "no question is being asked" when you certainly knew a question was asked. Disgraceful. 67.82.74.5 (talk) 02:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments and thought of creating a user account
Hi 67, thank you for your informed responses to the Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign article talk page. However, I noticed you are still using an IP address for your account. Have you considered creating a user account with a custom name? That way I won't have to call you 67! Thanks again and Happy Holidays. BootsED (talk) 02:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- maybe, but I don't really feel like coming up with a name. I'll think about it. 67.82.74.5 (talk) 02:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- have you used a registered account before? soibangla (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- no just ip addresses 67.82.74.5 (talk) 02:29, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- have you used a registered account before? soibangla (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Isabelle Belato 16:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello. This is fine and I will of course abide by and respect your block from that user's talk page. After I saw your comment I did stop trying to restore the comment he was deleting, as I learned from you that it is allowed to remove comments. But, when he made further negative remarks about my supposed bad behavior, I responded with a new comment to rebut this smear. I don't have anything further to say. I was just bothered and felt I had valuable input to add on the topic, since just as he had requested feedback on his candidacy for adminship, he engaged in willful deceit on my RfC due to a content dispute, falsely writing that it should be removed for being "malformed" due to "no question is being asked." He certainly knew there was a question being asked and options present and spitefully wrote that because we were engaged in a disagreement about the content (where my position was that reliable sources attributing Trump as having said he'd be a dictator on "day one" was adequate for inclusion; whereas his position was that I needed to "show him on the video where Trump says that" and ignore the reliable sources attributing this to him.) Anyway, that is all from me on this matter. 67.82.74.5 (talk) 16:37, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Please don't say "If Trump is elected in 2024, there'll be no election in 2028"
Hi IP67, While I appreciate your comments, I am a bit confused where your statement that "If Trump is elected in 2024, there'll be no election in 2028" came from. It's not in the sources that were discussed in the rfc and even then it's quite an extraordinary statement. I think there is potential to have a subsection on the page under the section "Rhetoric" called "Authoritarian statements" where this dictator comment, Trump's other comments, the Biden campaign's response to those comments, and the comments of notable commentators and Congressmen can be placed. However, by putting this phrase in the rfc, I'm afraid you are overcomplicating the original question of the rfc, which is to say "Should the article state, as claimed by reliable sources, that Trump said he'd be a dictator on day one of his presidency, and discuss the wider topic of Trump and dictatorship, which has been extensively covered in reliable sources?" We just need a consensus yes or no on this question alone. I don't want the conversation to get distracted about whether or not if Trump wins there will be no more elections. If you still feel strongly about this you can make another rfc after this one to discuss this claim. BootsED (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- I never proposed putting that statement into the article. I was simply making clear the subtext of the idea that Trump will rule as a dictator.67.82.74.5 (talk) 01:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, that's good to hear. But I do think saying that sentence may complicate the discussion or confuse editors as to the substance of the original question. BootsED (talk) 02:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- I never proposed putting that statement into the article. I was simply making clear the subtext of the idea that Trump will rule as a dictator.67.82.74.5 (talk) 01:50, 9 December 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 is a brief 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.