User talk:Hallelujahknowledge

July 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Lawrence School, Lovedale, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Uricdivine (talk) 01:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

talk:Hallelujahknowledtalk:Hallelujahknowledgegetalk:Hallelujahknowledge 176.220.210.121 (talk) 01:29, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry, who are you? Hallelujahknowledge (talk) 02:10, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

March 2023

Hello, I'm SunDawn. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Financial domination—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 13:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Why would you do that? Your writing communicates the wrong message.

You've written "It is often said that the money slave has to limit himself to the subsistence level and has no right to get anything in return." That's not true! That's misandrist and very inhumane, malicious and derogatory! You're violating Wikipedia's guidelines and promoting hate speech on there. If you wish to say, such a nature exists within Findom, then you must explicitly mention so! You should not just broadly say, like it applies in our daily life. I've never heard anyone say that about a 'money slave'. You see, when you say 'it's often said', it applies broadly to everything and makes it an accepted public opinion. IT IS NOT A PUBLIC OPINION. That is wrong. There is no excuse for it. It's like talking of Nazis and saying "it is often said Blacks are monkeys", when you should be saying "Nazis often ridicule and compare Blacks to monkeys. A comparison disproven by science".

You also say "it is crucial that the dominant part humiliates the submissive and shows him his supposed inferiority." Again, it's the same thing here. Instead of describing a phenomena, you're promoting it! Anybody reading that would think you're a proponent of such discrimination. You're not being objective at all! Imagine of all the vulnerable men that come on here and read that? That's terrible! Please politically correct the article.

Please do not take offense to it, but you do not sound like you're a native English speaker, that to me means, you're either just being well-intentional and informative with your, unknowingly erroneous, writings OR you've got a hidden agenda there.

Please, for the love of God, heed to my concerns! Your writing, be it in good faith or bad, communicates the WRONG message. If you've got a personal gain out of it, relinquish it! On the grander scheme of things sociopathic gains do NOT outweigh morality! People are not all different, no matter how you may feel otherwise! You're simply in a different phase. You do not have to be a demon feeding off of suffering to get by in life. You're NOT a demon. Hallelujahknowledge (talk) 14:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry. I mistook you for the author. How does this work? Are there people assigned specifically to function as an arbitrator and review edits? Also, if I do away with the "brainwash" terminology I used, would you allow my edit? Hallelujahknowledge (talk) 15:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

generally all permission active setting complete gor Android default action setting complete my devices 2400:C600:346A:22E4:1:0:8F37:1A4F (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Michelle Blair (real-life "Miss McKenzie").png

Thank you for uploading File:Michelle Blair (real-life "Miss McKenzie").png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. MarcGarver (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2023 (UTC)