Jump to content

User talk:Bustamove1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Shearonink (talk) 01:50, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Arjayay. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the main body of Neil McLeod (politician). Generally, any relevant external links should be listed in an "External links" section at the end of the article and meet the external links guidelines. Links within the body of an article should be internal Wikilinks. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 09:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
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) 02:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:44, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

[edit]

Hello, Bustamove1! I am very glad to see that you added Template:User Confederate removal and Template:User No Lost Cause to your userpage. Having that in mind, I must ask you to consider endorsing a closely related essay, WP:NOCONFED, in which creation I participated. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 12:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sundostund I appreciate your kind invitation and your contributions to the project page, particularly changes to one highly disputed paragraph. I also thank you for self-identifying as Serbian and and a thirty-something resident of Belgrade. I realize that you did not initiate WP:NOCONFED.
That stated...
1) What are your particular intentions for supporting the project in the context of a racialized ethnostate mentioned in the page?
2) Given the content of several of your userboxes, can you very briefly explain your perspectives on nationality, nationalism, and ethnicity, in this and other (shifting) contexts? Further, can you clarify your "individual rights" vs. "human rights"? I inferred present-day conceptions of both.
3) I read a copy editor's 1/17 revision summary that included "native american genocides" during "this time period." What are your perspectives on that issue, especially vis-à-vis post-1854 Republican and Democratic partisan ideas, policies, and intra-factionalism, antebellum and postbellum?
I suppose that I could pose these questions to the page creator as well, but I'll start with you. Of course, you can decline to respond, or only respond to certain questions or even facets of such questions...I'm aware that you may or may not be busy and that my endorsement is only a line for a project that seems to be gathering momentum.
On an entirely different note---I occasionally study the history of a Serbo-Croatian language, specifically changes and continuities in the national politics of script, i.e., Latin alphabetics and Cyrillic (less so an external severing of Serbian from Croatian). I'm curious about your reasons for supporting an iteration(s) of Serbo-Croatian, distinct from the foregoing questions. Regardless, I wish you well on your wiki-pursuits. Bustamove1 (talk) 07:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bustamove1, thank you very much for your lengthy response to my message, and for your very detailed questions! I'll try to be as much detailed in my response as possible, as I'd certainly like to give you some answers. Anyway:
1) My primary and main intention and motivation for supporting this project is that I am a strict anti-racist, and highly opposed to attempts at historical whitewash regarding slavery and racism as the cornerstone of the Confederacy. Those attempts strive to obscure slavery and racism as main reasons for the 1860–61 secession in the first place, and present the Confederacy and its war goals as something chivalrous and noble. I firmly believe that neo-Confederates and alt-rightists shouldn't be allowed to use Wikipedia as one of their online venues, and should be subjected to the same scrutiny as neo-Nazis and racists of other persuasions. Therefore, I am convinced that WP:NOCONFED should have the same weight as WP:NONAZIS and WP:NORACISTS, and that it should be applied with the same zeal and strictness ad the other two essays.
2) As for the content of several of my userboxes, I am opposed to the very concept of nationalism, as I am well aware of all the chaos that various nationalisms created in the region where I live, back in the 1990s, with the scars and trauma from that period still very much visible today. When it comes to nationality and ethnicity, I do believe that people of the same nationality, living in the same circumstances and environment, may have more in common than people of the same ethnicity, living in totally different conditions, and bound only by some vague arguments of "history and blood". Along that line, it could be claimed that, for a successful relationship, it is far more important that two people share character and personality traits, than what their sex/gender is. Regarding my views about "individual rights" vs. "human rights", I would say that the notion of human (or collective) rights was used far too often, in the past and in the present time, as an argument to trample upon the rights of an individual. I just felt the need to reiterate that in one of my userboxes.
3) I would say that the notion of "native american genocides", however vague it may be, is correct to some extent. Obviously, Native American nations and tribes once lived in almost every corner of the continent, and that radically changed in the 18th–19th century period. Nowadays, they have only a fraction of their former lands and populations, and it could be claimed that they were subjected to some kind of "indirect genocide" by the incoming white settlers. When it comes to Republican and Democratic partisan ideas, both in the antebellum and postbellum periods, I find it to be a real historical paradox how their policies and ideas changed since the time of the Civil War, up to the present time. Needless to say, and despite being politically independent, I am far more inclined to support modern-day Democratic positions (especially with the obvious intrusion of alt-right in the modern Republican Party). Simultaneously, I am aware that, pretty much, it should be thanked to the historical Republicans that the Union survived in the 1860s, and that the US entered the 20th century as a single nation.
I hope that I gave you some satisfactory answers and clarifications. It was my pleasure to respond to them, and I can only encourage you to approach the page creator on these issues as well, if you choose so. As for being busy – I am never really busy for Wikipedia-related things. When it comes to your endorsement, trust me – it is not only a line for a project, but a clear sign of being willing to stand behind the ideas espoused in the project, and that is something of immense value. I can only share your hope that this project is gathering momentum, and that its importance will only grow in the future.
I am very glad to hear that you are interested in Serbo-Croatian language. It isn't so common, for a person coming from an entirely different part of the world. In the region where I live, the issue of language is in the service of petty political issues and purposes, and I have always been disgusted by that. People of this region, basically, speak the same language, not needing much effort to understand each other (not counting some regional differences). I firmly believe that there should be one, official iteration, as it was for decades until the early 1990s. Until that happens again, the world will continue to laugh at us, as we divide our language and invent new ones for political goals, while entire continents speak English and Spanish as a single language.
In the end, I can only thank you for your good wishes, and to wish you well in your work, both here and elsewhere!
— Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 13:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Bustamove1. In all honesty, I do wonder about your thoughts regarding my post above, despite its been over a year since our last conversation. I am still looking forward to your comment; of course, I will understand if you are not interested in it. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 09:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. At this time, I prefer to neither inquire about, nor have you elaborate on, "have the same weight"; "correct to some extent"; "their policies and ideas changed "; "modern day Democratic positions"; "I firmly believe that there should be one, official iteration, as it was for decades until the early 1990s [presumably until the wars and including script]"; "we divide our language and invent new ones"; etc. I can periodically contribute to wiki-articles on cultural productions from your neck of the woods, e.g., providing comparative historical contexts, drafting a requisite reception section, and starting a translation history subsection for Dictionary of the Khazars. A history of translators, contracts, and translations would provide more contexts for a strict dichotomy, posed or imposed by critics and proponents alike, that Pavic bounded lexical semantics to the world of "dreams" and not to the "flesh of reality." I would welcome you to contribute as well, but I'm quite sure you don't need the invitation. Best wishes, Bustamove1 (talk) 18:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bustamove1&oldid=1225403638"