User talk:Daimler92

September 2021

Hello, I'm Binksternet. Wikipedia 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 Anton LaVey 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. Binksternet (talk) 17:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you said the article on the official page of the church of Satan was less than neutral. Please explain this to me.

Thanks Daimler92 (talk) 17:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source is a primary source, while Wikipedia is based on WP:SECONDARY sources.

Most reviewers take the viewpoint of Blanche Barton who wrote in 1990's The Secret Life of a Satanist that LaVey's only connection to Jewish heritage was one great-grandmother. This great-grandmother married a "gypsy" man in Transylvania and bore a daughter named Luba Lupesku-Primakov, later known as Luba Kolton—LaVey's maternal grandmother. So the Jewish connection is too small, too distant to mention. Binksternet (talk) 19:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, since I'm Jewish myself it is commonly known that it's always the mother which pass on the "Jewishness". So the author is right. Daimler92 (talk) 10:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It might be "commonly known" but it's also complete nonsense. Someone who turns away from the Jewish religion should not be called Jewish.

There are three aspects of Jewishness: bloodline, culture and religion. LaVey had only the bloodline, and very little of that. Binksternet (talk) 17:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Your recent editing history at Kalergi Plan shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. XOR'easter (talk) 15:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I this a joke? Did I assume something without proof? Did I started to reserve edits without any proof? Daimler92 (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't matter. You need to read the link at WP:3RRNO which describes the only exemptions. Doug Weller talk 11:30, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop with the wp:soapboxing. Article talk pages are for discussing improvements to articles, not snaking about users.Slatersteven (talk) 15:51, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's right, I hope you informed the other one as well Daimler92 (talk) 20:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Persistent edit warring and vandalism by User:Daimler92 regarding your edits. Thank you. —Bangalamania (talk) 00:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not dumb

Please read WP:NOTDUMB.Slatersteven (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. BilletsMauves^€500 09:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]