User talk:AFreshStart/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Bangalamania, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Bangalamania! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Lectonar (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 17:00, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

TonyBallioni (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Mural

At least one of the sources does say it was only allegedly antisemitic, and a couple of others are rather less then firm in calling it antisemitic.Slatersteven (talk) 17:26, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

If you wish to re-add ‘allegedly’, that’s fine by me. It just seems that most RS don’t seem o be that ambiguous about its antisemitism. – Bangalamania (talk) 17:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Wish

Help. Help fix [1] for article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you. 42.115.39.209 (talk) 11:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@42.115.39.209: Hi there! I have added some archives for pages with connection issues (using the Wayback Machine), and have replaced the dead Instagram link with what I presume is the same content, but posted on Facebook. --Bangalamania (talk) 11:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

OK. But link # 7 has Invalid |dead-url=n.42.115.39.209 (talk) 11:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that, typo on my part (should have been |deadurl=no). Fixed. --Bangalamania (talk) 11:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Past account

If I query you about a previous account I suspect you to have operated, will you state that this is your first Wikipedia account or will you acknowledge having edited under another account? As any significantly experienced Wikipedia editor can deduce, you certainly are not a new Wikipedia editor. Keep in mind that I'm not directly stating that you are violating WP:Sock since I have not stated here which previous account I suspect you to be and since there are legitimate reasons for an alternative Wikipedia account.

If you reply to me on this, there is no need to ping me since your talk page is on my watchlist. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:12, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I have edited Wikipedia under another account prior to this one (which I now no longer use). I really would rather not disclose my previous account on my main user page as a number of online activists have tried to link me to the Philip Cross/GCHQ conspiracy theory (see here, here on Twitter, as well as comments on blogs here and here; there are other comments along these lines which have been deleted). I feel that by linking to my previous account would compromise my identity and lead to off-wiki harassment (as happened to Philip Cross, although there was more of a two-way thing there).

I can understand why this may seem evasive, but I can assure you that this is the only account which I am using now. –Bangalamania (talk) 19:05, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

For now, I'm going to withhold the name of the account I suspect you to have operated. I will state that the account is indefinitely blocked and the account recently seemed to make it clear that there will be no attempt to get the account unblocked. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Racism in the UK Conservative Party

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Racism in the UK Conservative Party has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --Bangalamania (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in the Electronic cigarette topic area. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

QuackGuru (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with Papermaking

thats all :-) YamaPlos talk 22:32, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah, you're very welcome! – Bangalamania (talk) 00:31, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Freedom for Humanity) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Freedom for Humanity.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

Thank you for your informative new article on the mural "Freedom for Humanity",

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:47, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Xi Jinping

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guid of Copy Editors of the article Xi Jinping has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:17, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Good job establishing the Wikipedia article Plan S about new open access policies. You took a difficult topic with lots of perspectives and limited actual third party explanation and established a workable Wikipedia article around it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Aha, thank you very much! Although I do think that editors such as Quantum Knot and others such as yourself deserve the credit for explaining the plan, introducing perspectives and making a better Wikipedia article out of it. --Bangalamania (talk) 14:50, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bangalamania. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Courtesy notice - articles related to pseudoscience and fringe science

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Ronz (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Xi Jinping

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Xi Jinping you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Xi Jinping

The article Xi Jinping you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Xi Jinping for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 10:20, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Squirt.org

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Squirt.org has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (2016–present)

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (2016–present) has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the GAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --Bangalamania (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Chequers plan copy edit

Thank you very much! --Bangalamania (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Xi Jinping

The article Xi Jinping you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Xi Jinping for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DannyS712 -- DannyS712 (talk) 00:21, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Linda Sarsour

I nominated the Linda Sarsour article for GA; Sarsour is a controversial Muslim American feminist activist. Would you like to review it?MagicatthemovieS (talk) 21:30, 11 January 2019 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS

@MagicatthemovieS: Hey, sorry I didn't reply to your message sooner. Glad to see that that page has made it to GA, congratulations! — Bangalamania (talk) 14:35, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

I opened a discussion at Talk:Brides of ISIL#Concerns over the lead... Geo Swan (talk) 00:48, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: Sorry for the late reply here; I've talked about the issue on that talk page and reverted the page to a previous version as I agree that my wording was poor. --Bangalamania (talk) 23:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chequers plan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chequers plan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 10:03, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chequers plan

The article Chequers plan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Chequers plan for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 11:02, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

@Femkemilene: Hi, I noticed that in the review you flagged up issues of neutrality and a lack of focus within the article. What specifically did you mean by that? (Sorry if I missed anything obvious, I'm fairly new to the whole process). --Bangalamania (talk) 19:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

I think I may have made a mistake, so that you comments are not completely visible from the talk page, but that you have to go to the review page instead. In terms of neutrality, it is mostly the balance of content. A lot is written about Johnson, while a lot of different content is left out. There was one sentence that seemed questionable to me whether it should be in the article as well: the praise that his speech was PM material. Femke Nijsse (talk) 07:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chequers plan

The article Chequers plan you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Chequers plan for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 19:41, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jacob Rees-Mogg

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jacob Rees-Mogg you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AlastairJHannaford -- AlastairJHannaford (talk) 06:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jacob Rees-Mogg

The article Jacob Rees-Mogg you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Jacob Rees-Mogg for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AlastairJHannaford -- AlastairJHannaford (talk) 23:02, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: None of the content I have added is defamatory, and is backed by reliable sources as far as I know. --Bangalamania (talk) 01:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Bangalamania, most of these edits are guilt by association. Rich people spend time with rich people. The Charlie Rose edit, I recommend you take that out and seek consensus on the talk page for that one. That may be worth including. But mind WP:BLP. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:53, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Muboshgu That's perfectly fair, I can see now that I was being too hasty in a lot of my edits. Apologies for causing you any excess trouble. --Bangalamania (talk) 01:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Bangalamania, it's okay. I appreciate you saying that. Keep the policies of WP:NOTNEWS in mind as well. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:02, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Add tabloid-type stuff to BIOs

I can't imagine what you are thinking to add info such as "In December 2010, Handler alongside TV anchors Katie Couric and George Stephanopoulos, and director Woody Allen attended a party of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, hosted by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein." to numerous BIOs. You should remove all that tabloid-type gossipy stuff. I removed a few but you should clean this up yourself. Gandydancer (talk) 01:53, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't see why that information doesn't belong in a BLP. It's been mentioned by non-tabloid RSes, even before Epstein's suicide. I agree that a number of my edits on the address book were somewhat guilt by association though (see message above). --Bangalamania (talk) 01:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Bangalamania, rich people attending a party with rich people is also guilt by association. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

They attended a party that he attended as well. How can that possibly be notable enough to put in their BIO? Gandydancer (talk) 02:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

American TV anchors attending a British royal event hosted by a convicted paedophile is notable, and the sources I cited (non-tabloid) thought so too. It's not like they just rubbed shoulders one time. --Bangalamania (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I think I have reverted all my edits relating to this. Again, I am sorry to you both for the trouble I have caused. --Bangalamania (talk) 02:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

What a wonderful editor you are! I'm sorry to have used rather harsh language. Gandydancer (talk) 00:10, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Looking at Barbara Walter's bio I see that you also added other trivia as well (which has been reverted). In the future keep in mind that almost anything reported by just one source is questionable for a bio and if it's in the slightest derogatory most certainly is not OK to use. Gandydancer (talk) 13:48, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

This information is certainly not mere trivia, and has been covered in a number of articles. Her remarks caused controversy, reported in numerous sources, and mentioning this notable controversy on her article (especially following more recent revelations) is not derogatory. --Bangalamania (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The information is poorly sourced and not presented neutrally or with proper attribution. Please discuss your changes on the article's talk page as per WP:BRD rather than reinserting the information over other editors' objections.

Your GA nomination of Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (1997–present)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (1997–present) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:21, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (1997–present)

The article Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (1997–present) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Islamophobia in the UK Conservative Party (1997–present) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:41, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Undeletion of article - American who received Russian political asylum: John Mark Dougan

I see you are involved in Russian related articles...

I created

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2019_October_22 for John Mark Dougan

I am new to this process but from what I have seen it seems difficult to undelete an article. Any help that you can provide would be most helpful!

The article is here: User:Moscowdreams

Moscowdreams (talk) 20:01, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Awesome work!

I just saw you created the Edith Badham article, checked it out and gotta say - great work!

Not sure if you’ve seen that Trove has a huge database of newspapers OCRed and searchable if you need sources. I found it invaluable. Let me know if you want any help, I’m going through our list of Australian WiR and getting them up to speed.

But, once again, great work! - Chris.sherlock (talk) 13:20, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much! If I ever do any more Aussie bios I'll be certain to look at Trove as it seems very useful . And good luck to you going through the Australian WiR list. --Bangalamania (talk) 17:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Badham.PNG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Badham.PNG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Coughs and sneezes spread diseases has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Bangalamania. Coughs and sneezes spread diseases, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. EnterpriseyBot (talk!) 01:53, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Coughs and sneezes spread diseases

On 2 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coughs and sneezes spread diseases, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that coughs and sneezes spread diseases (poster shown)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coughs and sneezes spread diseases. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coughs and sneezes spread diseases), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 12:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Manchurian plague

On 1 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Manchurian plague, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the origins of the modern hazmat suit can be traced to the use of PPE during the Manchurian plague of 1910–1911? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Manchurian plague. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Manchurian plague), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

--Guerillero | Parlez Moi 00:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Bangalamania

Thank you for creating Jill Insley.

User:MJL, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

What an interesting article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MJL}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:21, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Haha, thank you for reviewing! And yeah, totally out of the blue, dunno where I got the idea from

On a serious note, thank you for all your edits here and for your support!

(said something similar on the article talk but thought I'd reiterate comments here) --Bangalamania (talk) 03:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Kurtis Conner for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kurtis Conner, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurtis Conner until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit at QAnon

Regarding your edit [2], I totally understand your removal given the source that was linked. I googled the wording "QAnon's ongoing obsession with a global elite of bankers also has antisemitic undertones" and found that it exists in the ADL's main primer page here (https://www.adl.org/qanon) so I re-added with that source added. The link you saw was hotlinked to that wording from that page so I think that confused whoever added the wording and sourcing originally. IHateAccounts (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

IHateAccounts, the only issue I have with this is that it now includes links to the ADL page on blood libel and alleged Jewish control of the Federal Reserve, neither of which mention QAnon (although both are hotlinked on the main primer page as you say). This seems a bit like synthesis of material to me, even if it doesn't include information not already mentioned on the ADL's main QAnon page. --Bangalamania (talk) 21:46, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Again I think that they were included because the main ADL article itself hotlinks those terms on the page https://www.adl.org/qanon.

1. Text: "Several aspects of QAnon lore mirror longstanding antisemitic tropes. The belief that a global “cabal” is involved in rituals of child sacrifice has its roots in the antisemitic trope of blood libel," -> The words "blood libel" are a hotlink to https://www.adl.org/education/resources/glossary-terms/blood-libel
2. Text: "And QAnon’s ongoing obsession with a global elite of bankers also has deeply antisemitic undertones" -> The words "deeply antisemitic undertones" are hotlinked to https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/jewish-control-of-the-federal-reserve-a-classic-anti-semitic-myth

So I see what you're saying but in this case, given that the ADL's own website crosslinks them, it's not Wikipedia "synthesis" as I understand it? IHateAccounts (talk) 21:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm probably using synthesis wrong here. I still don't know how to feel about using those pages which don't mention QAnon at all; I understand that the terms are linked on the ADL page in order for the reader to click on the link to understand more, but since Wikipedia already has linked articles on the blood libel (for example), I don't really see how the reference is very helpful. But I won't undo your revert. --Bangalamania (talk) 22:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Danny Gonzalez

Moved Draft:Danny Gonzalez to Danny Gonzalez after doing clean-up. Please check and use talk page before moving back to draft.

@Lefton4ya: Thanks for the edits! Sorry that the page didn't make it. --Bangalamania (talk) 23:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)