User talk:M.Bitton/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Own photos

Hello, I only upload my photos, which I have properly uploaded to the system and confirmed the rights to the photos. Thanks in advance for returning all my posts. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not Flickr. Taking photos doesn't give you the right to plaster them all over the place. M.Bitton (talk) 17:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I tried to add only photos that enrich the topic at hand. Do you feel that the photos would not be beneficial to the selected topics and sections? I chose really honestly. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 17:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I'll be honest with you. To me, it appears that you are more interested in promoting yourself and your photos than looking for what's best for the project. M.Bitton (talk) 17:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear colleague, I write articles mainly about African religions for the Czech and Slovak wikipedia. Of course, these pages have a minimum number of visitors. I'm certainly not doing it for my own promotion. I will ask specifically again: do you think that the photo of the protective amulet (massive expanded in Benin households) does not enrich the page West African Vodun? Others very similar. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 17:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Is that the only photo that you intend to add? M.Bitton (talk) 17:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

To the Vodun site, yes. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 17:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

That's a no then, because I asked you a specific question. M.Bitton (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Colleague, the second photo tells about the syncretism of Vodun and Christianity. It also has a high informative value. But if I had to choose only one, I would choose the amulet of protection. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

You're still avoiding to answer the question (which was about whether you intend to add more than one of your photos to the whole project and not just to an article). M.Bitton (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I added photos that I thought would be helpful. I don't have more photos useful for the topics. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 18:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

You plastered your own photos all over the place while making no effort to look for suitable images on Commons. 18:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC) M.Bitton (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Your first question was if the photos were mine. Yes, they are. Your other reasons are becoming more and more unclear. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 18:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Your answer to my first question confirmed my suspicion. If after everything I said it's still unclear to you, then there isn't a lot I can do about it. M.Bitton (talk) 00:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

For example, West African Vodun page does not include any photo of the classic vodun protective amulet that I uploaded.

As an Africanist, I have the impression that it belongs there. If you understand the topic, I will be happy to discuss it with you. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

As I explained, it's about the conflict of interest and not a cherry picked topic. M.Bitton (talk) 17:38, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear colleague, you have not explained anything. We'll take it from the last post. North Africa. The page does not contain a single photo of the most typical landscape of North Africa, i.e. the Sahara. Why did you delete this particular photo? Doesn't it enhance the content? HistoriaSalutis (talk) 17:54, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

What makes you think that your second rate photos of a dune belong there? M.Bitton (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Let's talk about one topic. Are you talking about Vodun or North Africa? HistoriaSalutis (talk) 18:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

The only topic that is worth talking about is the clear conflict of interest. M.Bitton (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear Colleague, what conflict of interest? What leads you to these conclusions? Given the speed with which you deleted the photos, it is clear that you did not consider their contribution at all. What exactly is your motivation? HistoriaSalutis (talk) 18:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

My motivation is the exact opposite of yours. M.Bitton (talk) 18:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Which, as I see it, is taking away useful content and censorship. HistoriaSalutis (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

You would say that, otherwise, how else are you supposed to justify what you did. For example: with thousands of free quality images of North Africa, you thought that the two below average ones that you took deserve a prominent place in the article. The same for the Pyramid of Djoser (luckily, an editor reverted your edit). I don't know about the rules of the Czech and Slovak wikipedias, but the fact that they let you get away with creating articles about yourself in both of them (something that will never be tolerated on en.wp) is probably to blame for your lack of understanding of the issue. Having said everything I needed to say, I have no intention of going round in circles, entertaining your parallel threads. M.Bitton (talk) 00:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Why do you do this?

I was looking at a Wikipedia article and I was wondering what motivates you to make these edits? Cool they may be, but tedious 68.202.236.185 (talk) 05:24, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

The article on Numidia is not about the roman province

Please revert your edits, the "Numidia" of the latin sources is an administrative division that fluctuated in time with Mauritania caesarensis and Africa zeugitana, all of those are treated by the article on Africa proconsularis, while the the Numidia that you referenced everywhere is a berber civilization, that ended with the roman conquest of the region.

Arab ethnolinguistic/ethnic

Greetings! An account has been messing around with the neutralized people qualifier in the lede to make it point to ethnic group. I explained that the ethnolinguistic/ethnic discussion that you started was ongoing on the talkpage, but he has now exceeded three reverts. Could you please have a look? Kind Regards-- Soupforone (talk) 04:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@Soupforone: It looks like they stopped (at least for now). I will keep an eye on it nonetheless. M.Bitton (talk) 00:14, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

CambridgeBayWeather just indicated that there is no clear denouement to the discussion [1], so I've requested a templated close [2]. Kind Regards-- Soupforone (talk) 14:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

@Soupforone: I cleaned up the talk page a bit (struck comments by socks, etc) to make it more readable for the closer. The other thing that may need highlighting is CaliphoShah's position: they oppose the use of the ethnolinguitistic term to describe the Arabs[3] (even though it's reliably sourced), but they have no problem introducing it in the Berber article[4]). M.Bitton (talk) 00:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

March 2018

Regarding Ketchaoua Mosque, i edited the page with official references, so this edit should be constructive. I don't understand for which reason you blame me with unconstructiveness. I have my evidences, but you revert my edit with no reason. --Ushuaia1 (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

The official name, which also happens to be the common one, is already stated in the article. Feel free to take your concerns to the article's talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

talk of Moors

i add the discussion in the talkpage. i invite--BrugesFR (talk) 23:48, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Blocked

Hi M.Bitton, i reported the disruptive editor (History21st) who was POV pushing in several articles to ANI, he is now blocked for 1 month : [5], just to let you know. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:31, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@Wikaviani: Thank you for letting me know. M.Bitton (talk) 22:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

2000 attack by Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat

The 2000 attack was planned by an Algerian group called "Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat". This group later (2003 if my memory serves me right) gave allegiance to Al Qaida. When English-speaking sources mention an "al-Qaeda-linked grouped", they are making a fuzzy reference to the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat. So please stop removing the exact name of the group. Rama (talk) 18:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

List of wars involving Algeria

Hello.

The current formulation seems strange. The only direct involvment of Algeria is in 1976-1977, in Amgala. The rest of the time, they were just supporting the Polisario and the SADR, supplying weapons for instance. French or Mauritanian soldiers never met an Algerian soldier during this war. It is correct to say that the France and Mauritania were belligerants fighting against the Polisario but they fought only in the Mauritanian part of Western Sahara, where no Algerian soldier ever went.

--Le Petit Chat (talk) 09:49, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Le Petit Chat: I have separated the main belligerents from their supporters. Hopefully, this will make it less strange to you. M.Bitton (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:STiki!

Hello, M.Bitton, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Babymissfortune 06:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

Cox

Hi, my edit on the Cox article was no vandalism - I am one of the theoretical physicist to whom he sends his garbage and he really has no idea what he is talking about. I keep out of law, let him keep out of physics. Stefan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4CA0:24F1:3000:F68E:38FF:FE7A:9B06 (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Replacing what you don't like with contentious material about a living person is not acceptable. Please take some time to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's content policies before taking your concerns to the article's talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Ted Fang sources

Are the claims made in Mr. Fang's biography not sourced from self published material? The only reference that Tera Capital has any interest in Days Inn China is from the Tera Capital site. Some of the links on the Tera Capital site used as references are dead as well. Ted Fang is deceitful and dishonest. Why allow him to publish material that may not be true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrgodo (talk • contribs) 05:14, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a very strict inclusion policy when it comes to articles about living persons. Your edit has been reverted because the content you added is unsourced and contentious. M.Bitton (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations from WP:STiki!

	The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
	Congratulations, M.Bitton! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Orphan Wiki 10:34, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Orphan Wiki 10:34, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Why did you undo edit to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox

Why is it better not to link to another topic in wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.20.176.6 (talk) 00:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@216.20.176.6: Because it's already linked in the "Motion and manipulation" section. There is no need for another one. M.Bitton (talk) 00:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

What have you done to Gnawa topic?!

Why did you removed some paragraphs from the topic of Gnawa?! You have no idea about them or where they're participating. Those paragraphs were already removed by an anonymous user and retrieved them and you did the same mistake as him you removed them plus you're not an Editor or Moderator to order us or remove special information if you found it look for a source yourself why order others to look it for you? Removing without checking trough the Internet will make you a useless user that's why Google is there to check up if the information is real, so please next check in Google before rampaging in Wikipedia. Jamaru25 (talk) 14:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Actually, I restored the content that you deleted without explanation and removed the OR that you introduced, despite being asked numerous times to refrain from doing so. This is not just a one off incident, and I should know since I've been silently cleaning up after you for quite some time without even bothering with the customary warnings, since the ones in your you talk page didn't seem to be having any effect. Do you know want me to name you some of the articles where you either introduced OR, deleted sourced content or misrepresented the sources? M.Bitton (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations from WP:STiki!

		The Bronze STiki Barnstar of Merit
		Congratulations, M.Bitton! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Here is a ref you asked: FYI. Remembering Macaulay, the imperialist we love to hate - Livemint https://www.livemint.com/.../Remembering-Macaulay-the-imperialist-we-love-to-hate....

You control wikis and their narratives anyway so do whatever to silence others. You asked for a ref. you got one. I dont have any more time to waste on this.2601:646:9300:2370:24A4:32:5B99:7EE (talk) 18:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia Usage

Hello i'm new at wikipedia can you help me i noticed that you told a Guest Like this Style is this Template ? or what i wan't to protect wikipedia too like you can you help me to write warning like you?--Gyan333 (talk) 00:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gyan333: Yes, it's a template. Using Twinkle is one way of doing it. M.Bitton (talk) 00:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Algiers

You deleted my contribution on the grounds that it is already mentioned in the battle's article - presumably the wiki page on Operation Torch. What is meant by 'already'? People can reach the Algiers history section without reading the Operation Torch page first. I have summarised many battles in local history pages without provoking this curious reaction, often receiving thanks for help. Valetude (talk) 02:05, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Valetude: There is nothing strange about someone not agreeing with your edit. I just don't see the point of cherrypicking a sentence from an article we're linking to. M.Bitton (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC), and

Because most people skimming or scanning the history section will be quite content with a 2-line overview, when they may not be interested in investigating further. This is largely what Wiki is about. What you call Cherrypicking, I call just ordinary editing. It seems a quite irrelevant term, when applied here. (As mentioned, my record on this issue is pretty respectable). Valetude (talk) 23:31, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

The cherrypicked sentence does not summarize the Operation Torch. There is no mention, among other things, of the fact that the Vichy regime was kept and the resistance leaders arrested afterwards (which is the most important thing as far as Algeria is concerned). That's why it's best to direct the interested readers to the article. M.Bitton (talk) 23:40, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Steve Lombardozzi edit

I got your message about my edit. I’m new to this and didn’t realize i needed to cite my edit. I made the edit because I grew up with his wife, and am friends with her on social media and in real life. StacheCHWV (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for typing that........ My little brother John got a hold of my Chromebook and made this account. I will try to not let him get on this ever again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slick jonny (talk • contribs) 03:23, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

About the birthplace of Abd al Mumin and ecyclopedia Britannica

The encyclopedia Britanniaca is absolutely not relevant when it comes to North Africa. The Nedroma and Tlemçen region where under the rule of the Almoravide, no need of sources, as it is logical. This article, in french, gives some indications about the historical continuum in the Tlemçen region: https://www.wdl.org/fr/item/8764/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by HfedBo (talk • contribs) 13:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

1) There is nothing wrong with the Britannica source. 2) Verifiability is non-negotiable. M.Bitton (talk) 22:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Larry Rothschild article

Hello Mark. I made the deletion because the information from sources in incorrect. Larry's paternal grandmother only had one Jewish parent. Larry's father converted to Catholicism in 1950 in order to marry Larry's Roman Catholic mother in the Roman Catholic Church. Larry is a baptized Catholic, is married to a Catholic, and they have raised their three children in the Catholic faith. This is personal family information.Darling ditsy (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Do you know?

This? Adam9007 (talk) 23:47, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

@Adam9007: I was looking into it when you reverted it. Anyway, it's all sorted now. M.Bitton (talk) 23:50, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Recent edit to Barbara Valentin

Hi, I don't know If I'm writing in the right place...I'm new here....yes, I have a source but I don't know how I can add it. I noticed that in another page of Wikipedia there is a big mistake...It says that Barbara was married with Ashton but It is wrong...I'm surprise that there are wrong infos here. I would like to add the right infos everywhere and delete the wrong ones :)

@Delilah258: This should help you with the referencing; just make sure the source is reliable. On a side note, when you add content to a talk page, please don't forget to sign your comment. M.Bitton (talk) 22:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Augustine of Hippo

I see you reverted my edit on Augustine of Hippo. I have added a legitimate source that states his ancestry also includes Phoenician and Latin. I have not erased what was already said previously because the source I added also said his ancestry includes Berber. Stating that the sources that are there are the only legitimates ones is Wikipedia:Cherrypicking and not allowed here on Wikipedia as far as I know.

I also clearly specified on my second source that ON PAGE 10 the author of the source points out how Augustine of Hippo identifies himself as Punic. YOU chose to read the other pages where it says Augustine used both the Punic and Berber language, ignoring the PAGE 10 where it states what I edited. This is also Wikipedia:CherrypickingMarc Frier (talk) 00:37, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

The first part was reverted because you changed a statement from one that describes the mainstream views (which can be attributed to a multitude of RS) to one that describes what the one source that you introduced says. This has nothing to do with cherrypicking.

On page 10 of the second source, the author talks about how Augustine named his first born following the Berber custom and mentions a quote in which he identifies himself as Punic, adding Thus we can authoritatively rule out the possibility of his having an Italian ethnic background. But in view of his tendency to employ the term "Punic" for both Berbers and those of Phoenician origin, as well as other Berber-like cultural artifacts evident in his own family history, this quotation does nothing to discredit the possibility of his Berber ethnicity. So, in this instance, not only did you cherry pick a sentence (by omitting significant qualifying information from the same source), but by engaging in editorializing (using the word "although" to imply a relationship between two unrelated statements), you also violated the WP:NOR policy.

Obviously, you're free to take your concerns to the article's talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

update and improvement of biography of Ms. Jensen Kyra Luthi

Hello M Bitton, I appreciate your message. Thanks for informing me of the edit summary. But really, it was for the improvement of the page following the artist's request. If you need a letter from the artist Kyra Luthi please let me know. In the meantime, I am sure you can review the page and confirm that all the improvement are good and aligned. Best regards, 122.54.157.233 (talk) 01:57, 5 August 2019 (UTC)Walter.

I want a wikipedia creator

Can anyone help me please Adityabelnekar (talk) 11:43, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Jack Palance

	Greetings
	I was wondering about that ~ I tried to read the linked articles ~ but got distracted ~ thank you ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 23:35, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

2018–19 Arab protests

Hi

It is not an OR. It is clearly related. If you consider that it is an OR, you must delete the article. --Panam2014 (talk) 23:51, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@Panam2014: What links the two is nowhere near as clear as you seem to think. You're more than welcome to start a conversation in the article's talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

In this case, please edit the article. Also, we have lots of sources. [6], [7], [8], [9] --Panam2014 (talk) 01:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

proof of sarah stiles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LMGVx31zso proves my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.165.178.84 (talk) 02:39, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

soft water regions of the US

I made the edit to the Soft Water article (changing "The only states with soft water are Mississippi and Maine" to "The only states with no hard water are Mississippi and Maine") because the US Hard Water Map used as a reference for that paragraph shows clearly that Mississippi and Maine are not the only states with soft water. Washington, Oregon, Texas, Louisiana, Tennessee, and several other states have large areas with soft water.

It isn't clear to me why the sentence is there at all, but if it needs to be there, it should be true. I read it and thought "that can't possibly be true", and in fact the sources referenced on the page clearly show that it isn't true. Another related statement could be "Only Mississippi and Maine have soft water throughout the entire state."

I have no strong feeling about it. If you want it to say what it says now, I won't argue. 2001:558:141A:9A:FDE7:3A08:7A08:E421 (talk) 00:46, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Another related statement could be "Only Mississippi and Maine have soft water throughout the entire state." Judging by that map, that wouldn't be true for Mississippi either. As a matter of fact, the whole sentence (which is original research based on an unreliable map) needs to be removed. Reliable sources such as the USGS make no such claims. M.Bitton (talk) 23:44, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Juba II image

Hello, why did you revert this edit? إيان (talk) 00:01, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

The bust in the image I added is in much better condition and far less worn. إيان (talk) 00:04, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

It's not about the condition, it's about how he probably looked. There are other images of him in the WP Commons (at the end of the article) if anyone is interested. M.Bitton (talk) 00:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

That's hearsay. I'm switching it back until you can substantiate your claim a little bit more than saying it's "how he probably looked." إيان (talk) 17:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Invite to use WikiLoop Battlefield

Hi M.Bitton,

I found that you are a power user for the counter-vandalism tool STiki. First of all, Kudos! Thank you for help protecting Wikipedia.

Secondly, we are building a new web-based counter-vandalism tool, hoping to make it easier to use, and wonder if you would be interested in giving it a try here: http://battlefield.wikiloop.org, and kindly give us feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiLoop Battlefield, thank you!

We currently started whitelist for DIRECT ROLLBACK features, if you are interested, ask us at Wikipedia talk:WikiLoop Battlefield too. User:Xinbenlv (talk) 09:13, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khaled (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Lang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

disruptive editing on Google Translate

A user called Juansantos123 keeps adding adding languages that aren't yet supported by Google Translate under the 'Supported languages' section and its 'History' sub-section, even though I've already added a hidden message under that section reminding people not to, even though I've already reverted 27 of his edits 12 times over the past three weeks, and even though I've already asked Fuzheado to protect the article from unconfirmed users for a year. How do I deal with his disruptive editing, and can you please warn Juansantos123 the next time he does this? -- PK2 (talk) 05:33, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

"The Test!"

It was a test, but more so it was me (an experienced editor and author of hundreds of articles) goofing around. I couldn't help myself; it was a bit of playful and harmless vandalism. I am glad you are on the ball by pouncing on dummies like me. I never do this kind of thing, but like I said it was almost irresistible. I kind of understand why trolls do what they do! -) ♥Golf (talk) 00:23, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@♥Golf: What edit are you referring to? M.Bitton (talk) 00:28, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

 *I was referring to my edit on 2020 Democratic Party presidential debates.  I was not signed for the edit, so all you got was an IP address. I did it though.  Draw and quarter me if you like for my maliciousness!  :-) ♥Golf (talk) 00:36, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Pastilla

Hey M.Bitton, I hope you're well. The French article on Pastilla has some info about pastilla varieties in Algeria, but they're uncited. Might you have some further info on those varieties so we can have them in the article in English? Regards. إيان (talk) 13:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@إيان: I am very well, thank you. I hope you're doing well too. To be honest, I don't find those articles particularly interesting; they usually end up in my watchlist while I'm following a POV pusher (if you look at my first edit, you'll understand what I mean). That being said, expanding the related articles instead of just reverting the baseless POV is probably not a bad idea; so, time permitting, I will try to look into some of them at some point. M.Bitton (talk) 22:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I know what you mean—I caught one after you at the article about seffa. You do a great job of it.

Cool, let me know if I can help with anything. إيان (talk) 22:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

إيان Thank you. Welcome to the marathon. M.Bitton (talk) 22:58, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Alladiya Khan page edit

Hello, I recently removed a section called 'ancestry' on the page 'Alladiya Khan'. Admittedly, I did not put any justification for this removal because I did not know how to put it.

The sentences were deleted because 1) they did not have any reliable citation or source, 2) they appeared baseless given the general knowledge on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.4.198 (talk) 23:36, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@129.215.4.198: I don't know anything about the topic, but I can easily find sources linking Alladiya Khan to Swami Haridas and Nath Vishwambhar. Since you seem to be familiar with the subject, I suggest you try to improve that section. M.Bitton (talk) 23:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Djellaba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adrar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Margarete Bagshaw

All of the changes I have made are accurate. She was my late wife and died 5 years ago. I was at those talks with here. Please undo your deletion. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:100C:D099:5111:AAAD:6ADC:38A5 (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry for your loss, but everyone has to abide by Wikipedia's core content policies. M.Bitton (talk) 00:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Bagshaw

I am not a techie. Here are the citations for the shows Margarete did in 2012 at The Museum of Indian Arts and Culture - http://www.indianartsandculture.org/past-exhibitions&eventID=1284

And The Ellen Noel Museum in Odessa, Texas https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=6P2vZtl7wzo&feature=emb_logo https://www.noelartmuseum.org/past-exhibitions-1 https://www.noelartmuseum.org/currentexhibitions http://www.mbagshaw.com/exhibits--lectures.html

I would certainly be very thankful if you could help me and get these events up on her Wikipedia site

 Done. M.Bitton (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Much. I think you used the Ellen Noel link for the Museum of Indian Arts and Culture.

Barny cakes

Hi the reference was already linked. It's number one in the list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:21B1:7F00:7C1B:85A3:C0E5:5B8E (talk) 14:16, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to RedWarn

Hello, M.Bitton! I noticed you have been using Twinkle and was wondering if you'd like to beta test my new tool, RedWarn, specifically designed to improve your editing experience.

• Easy to use - Unlike other tools, RedWarn uses easy to interpret icons and simple summaries for common actions, reducing both learning and reading times.
• Supports rollback and rollback-like functionality - Unlike Twinkle, RedWarn supports both rollback and rollback-like functionality for users will rollback permissions. This decreases waiting times during rollbacks.

• Making life easier on the battlefield - Ever been in the middle of a vandalism war or campaign, frantically reloading the history page to see a new edit? No more! Enabling RedWarn's "Alert on Change" feature will automatically send you to the latest edit when a new edit occurs - and if you're working on something else, RedWarn will send you a notification while the tab is still open in the background. No time wasted.
• Rollback previews - If you're ever worried about the changes a rollback will make, especially in the case of reverting good faith edits, you can click the rollback preview button to preview the difference a rollback will make, with the version that will be restored on the right, and the latest revision on the left.

• Always the latest revision - RedWarn will automatically redirect you to the latest revision if the rollback is no longer for the latest revision - no more frustrating errors.

• Fast - RedWarn can automatically select a warning level, and, on vandalism and content removal rollbacks, automatically select a warning template.

• Built on your feedback - RedWarn is receiving frequent feature additions and changes based on your feedback. If there's something you don't like, or would like to see, just say!

• and many more features ...but I don't want to fill your userpage.

RedWarn is currently in use by over 35 other Wikipedians, and feedback so far has been extremely positive. If you're interested, please see see the RedWarn tool page for more information on RedWarn's features which I haven't listed here. Otherwise, feel free to remove this message from your page. If you have any further questions, please ping me or leave a message on my talk page. Your feedback is much appreciated! Ed6767 talk! 19:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

I was actually just about to report User:2600:8800:8C81:3600:44D6:A906:9414:5126 to AIV. Thanks for doing the job for me :-). JeffSpaceman (talk) 22:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@JeffSpaceman: My pleasure. M.Bitton (talk) 23:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi i am making a big change has sri satguru jis death date that was reported in these references are false and i have evidence for it

Hi M.Bitton

I Have Evidence To The Fact That Sri Satguru Ram Singh Ji Has Not Passed Away.

http://kukasikhs.com/kukasikhs-wp/?cool_timeline=contradictions-in-the-death-report-of-satguru-ram-singh-ji#:~:text=%E2%80%9D%20I%20beg%20to%20report%20to,of%20the%20change%20very%20much%E2%80%A6.

On Friday, the 11th March 1872 at Calcutta Port, Sri Satguru Ram Singh ji, accompanied by his personal assistant, Bhai Nanu Singh, boarded the ship for Rangoon. At this occasion, Sri Satguru ji warned the Britishers that as a repercussion to what they have done to his person during winter, sufferings shall fall upon them in summer. And this happened after 75 years exactly. After the nine years confinement at Rangoon, His Holiness was then in 1880 was shifted to Mergui.

http://kukasikhs.com/kukasikhs-wp/?cool_timeline=calcutta-port-to-rangoon&

So Now Can You Revert To The Changes ?

@124.122.84.233: Your edit has been reverted because it wasn't supported by a reliable source. If, as you suggest, someone who is born in 1816 is still alive and you have RS to prove it, then you can start a discussion on the talk page and see what others have to say. M.Bitton (talk) 23:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry

For some reason my phone isn't working correctly. Wikiffeine •‿• 00:32, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

I tried to edit, but then my changes got all messed up and I don't know why. It was all of a sudden. I should have looked at the preview. Wikiffeine •‿• 00:34, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

My phone is about to die :-( Wikiffeine •‿• 00:37, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Um... Did you get my previous messages? Wikiffeine •‿• 00:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Wikiffeine: you need to get a new phone, or you might be blocked for disruptive editing. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 02:35, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Prahlad: I'll edit from my desktop, but I won't be able to edit as often. Wikiffeine •‿• 02:40, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Wikiffeine: hey, I guess that’s the better choice for everyone if it means that your contributions are not riddled with errors. ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 02:52, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Prahlad Alright, then. The weird part is that it only happened on one article. In any case, I'll try to keep editing from my desktop. If it saves Wikipedia from random characters all over the place, then I'll keep to my desktop. Wikiffeine •‿• 14:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Prahlad Or maybe I should just remember to look at the edit preview to see if my edits are working correctly. Wikiffeine •‿• 14:45, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Looks like you've got it all sorted out. M.Bitton (talk) 16:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Yep. As long as I check the preview and stay on my desktop, there shouldn't be too much to worry about. Goodbye M.Bitton, and goodbye Prahlad. Wikiffeine •‿• 18:00, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Almohad didnt used tifinagh

What kind of logic is that? Almohad first language was tamazight so their name in tifinagh must be on the page , why there is the latin alphabets of their name then? Were they using lating alphabets? Waliduec06 (talk) 21:26, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

As this is the en.wiki, we have no choice but to use the Latin characters. The Almohads didn't use tifinagh, therefore, there is no reason for their name to be associated with it. M.Bitton (talk) 21:36, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Reverting

Special:Diff/964327467 - reverting vandal, good. Reverting to another vandalised version, not so good. Please check your reverts before moving on. Cabayi (talk) 07:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Zirids

It's not for you to decide what's constructive and what is not. Put the source, or abstain from getting in the way of knowledge.

The sources are cited. All you need to do is click on the image. M.Bitton (talk) 23:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello M.Bitton !

I'm the User Who's ID is 37.39.245.9 , You Recently Have messaged me Regarding the Page of (Algiers) , And To your Concern i would like to Inform you that I Am Not the One who have Edit it , Nor Do I Know Who Have Done So , Thus It's most Likely Someone who's ID is very Similar To Mine , Or you have Confused me with the person who have Done So . Thank you , Have Great Day ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.39.245.9 (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Content update

Hi,

I have received a message from you saying that you "noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Cristín Leach, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so" -- can you show me what's been removed?

Additionally, I also corrected numerous spelling, grammar, and syntax mistakes, some of which seem to have been restored. I'm a professional copy editor so I tend to do that as a matter of habit. I presumed such corrections would be tolerated.

Cristín is a friend and former colleague of mine, so I probably included information that I'm already familiar with.

Thanks,

Lorcan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.142.233.50 (talk) 11:00, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

I was refering to as one of the world's best, which is unsourced and peacocky. Correcting the spelling, grammar, and syntax mistakes is always welcome, though I personnaly wouldn't consider changing "served as the paper's longest running art critic" to "served as the paper's longest serving art critic" as an improvement. M.Bitton (talk) 00:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about that revert I did, I was going through the IPs contributions and I seemed to have accidentally hit "rollback". My bad. Best, ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 00:36, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nkon21: No worries. Keep up the good work. M.Bitton (talk) 00:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

reply to message

Hi, Thanks for your message regarding the removal of content I added to the page about Masinissa. I thought I might have not done it correctly. I'd hoped to make wikipedia entries for my two books Masinissa: Ally of Carthage and Masinissa: Ally of Rome but when I tried to do that I got a bit lost in terms of how to do it correctly. Is there any way I can request those entries to be added to Masinissa's page? Both books are now available as e-books and their physical counterparts will be published on the 28th August. Thanks

Rob(----) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orejita7 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Orejita7: You may propose the changes on the article's talk page by using the {{request edit}} template. Good luck. M.Bitton (talk) 23:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment

Hello thank you for your comment about citations. I inadvertently overlooked doing so as I thought it was clear from other parts of the article. However I have gone ahead and added a citation for the comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowphone (talk • contribs) 21:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

@Yellowphone: Thank you. It would really help the readers if you could add the page number. M.Bitton (talk) 21:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey about deltarune

So umm do you want me to get the actual source cause there is only one photo message me back about this and we will sort it out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeeterboi135 (talk • contribs) 23:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Yeeterboi135: I suggest you start by familiarizing yourself with Wikipedia's content policies. M.Bitton (talk) 23:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I am kinda getting screwed over

I wrote down all my sources and evidence and put it down Into the deltarune page but then it got removed and now it just feels like the entire Wikipedia site has screwed me over. Please help. I don’t want to be banned from editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeeterboi135 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Yeeterboi135: You can always ask for help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Good luck. M.Bitton (talk) 23:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Reverts of world and continental maps

Dear M. Bitton,

Could you please comment on why my contributions of world and continental maps were reverted? Many thanks, Janwillemvanaalst (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@Janwillemvanaalst: They were reverted because: a) they are unsourced and b) they look nothing like what the average reader who's familiar with the the UN map, the CIA map, the AU map, etc. would expect to see (specifically, with regards to the borders of Algeria, Morocco and Western Sahara). M.Bitton (talk) 14:40, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: Thank you for clarifying. I would like to mention the following:

About your first argument (unsourced): I've always understood it's good practice to mention the source in the metadata fields on Wikimedia Commons. There, it clearly states that I am the author of the maps. I am a cartographer; this is what I do. It also clearly mentions that to be able to make this visualisation, I've used the CC-0 Natural Earth digital geodata, which is a well-known free geodata source (at least in the cartographic world). If you have any tips on still further clarifying the source of these maps, please let me know.

Your second argument, with all due respect, holds only for an American audience. In Europe, this particular visualization style is very common. Just open any Times Atlas of the World, and you'll find it immediately recognizable.

Therefore, I would like to kindly request to undo the reverts. And perhaps open a discussion on the respective talk pages so that others may share their considerations/arguments. Thank you! Janwillemvanaalst (talk) 06:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

You seem to be confusing Commons with Wikipedia. As far as the latter is concerned, you're not a reliable source and nor is the user generated and easily modifiable data that you used to make your map.

It's not about the visualization style, it's about the borders. The CIA map is used extensively on Wikipeddia and the idea that the UN map is meant for an American audience is baseless.

Since verifiability is non negotiable, I won't be reverting (restoring the WP:OR), but you're more than welcome to take your concerns to the talk pages. M.Bitton (talk) 23:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Ibn Khaldum edit

Hi sorry about earlier I am totally new to wiki,

Basically via this paper and article it shows Ibn Khaldum was Ashari only and was not a Mu'tazllah. In fact he critised them. I treid to add the reference but I did not know how to hence I just removed the Mu'tazzilah bit.

https://themaydan.com/2017/11/myth-intellectual-decline-response-shaykh-hamza-yusuf/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.198.192 (talk) 22:49, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@82.29.198.192: To learn how to add inline citations to articles, I suggest you read referencing for beginners. It's also good practice to provide an edit summary for your edits. Good luck. M.Bitton (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Can you just change it as you are the expert? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.198.192 (talk) 15:06, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Daniella Levine Cava Article

Hi, I apologize for not stating my reason why I removed some lines in the Daniella Levine Cava Article is due to questions about the reliability of sources. I know Wikipedia likes articles to be sourced from neutral soures. However, one of teh sources that continuously comes up in the Daniella Levine Cava Article is from a blog called "Keeping Up With Cava". When I visited the page, I was saddened to see how prejudicial the information on this site is. I encourage you to go to the site as it is basically filled with content saying how bad Daniella Levine Cava is. I encourage how neutral critisms of anyone who is being has an article about them, however this source is not neutral and basically seems like a political blog written by someone who does not like Daniella Levine Cava, which I believe is not a neutral source that warrents an inclusion in a Wikipedia article. Therefore, I removed " Levine entered the race in 2014, controversially taking her husband's last name in order to seem more appealing to Hispanic voters, who make up more than 40% of the district's population." in the first paragraph under the Political Carrer section and "However, Cava has also come under fire after criticism that she ignored her district, which suffered through a major crime wave in 2017, with a 20% increase in overall crime that year" in the third paragraph of the political carrer section. I hope you can see how the inclusion of these statements from this prejudicial source is the equivalent of using a campaign website as a source for this article. Thank you for your concerns :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.204.70.78 (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, if you can find neutral sources that say the same information, then of course it is ok to keep the information. However, I cannot find these neutral sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.204.70.78 (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@107.204.70.78: Provided you give a valid reason (based on WP policies, such as WP:RS and WP:BLP) on the article's talk page, there is nothing stopping you from being bold again. Good luck. M.Bitton (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

thank

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mamaaaaaaaaa (talk • contribs) 23:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism

hello I just found incorrect information on an article and I think it's a vandalism ÇaUl9 (talk) 18:47, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Oops! Note to IP

Hi there! With the greatest respect, I think you might want to consider removing this note to 130.88.240.85, the problem being that their change was correct. The lane is Cottingwood (like the place), even though the school house is Collingwood (like the superstar admiral and large statue at Tynemouth). Hope this helps, best wishes DBaK (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered:  Done. An edit summary would have helped. M.Bitton (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much. DBaK (talk) 14:24, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered: Thank you very much indeed for letting me know. M.Bitton (talk) 14:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

No problem. I was baffled when I looked at it at first – the mixture of Cottingwood and Collingwood in one article looked just too unlikely! I have left HTML notes which might help editors in future (including me when I have forgotten ...) Cheers DBaK (talk) 14:34, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

The Haunted Mansion

In the Development section of The Haunted Mansion article, citation [5] in the sixth paragraph of that section, which is supposed to link to an article on the We Love Orlando site, actually redirects to a PORN site. This link is no longer correct and should be removed as a citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.144.16 (talk) 00:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@24.0.144.16: I have removed it. Thank you for letting me know. M.Bitton (talk) 00:24, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Taven

HI. The used didnt stop. he keeps doing the same edition in the matt taven article. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:29, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@HHH Pedrigree: Next time, if you decide to report someone, please do it in your name and don't revert a report (like you did here) that was withdrawn by whomever filed it. M.Bitton (talk) 01:06, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry. I included my name with yours', sometimes I have seen this kind of reports from two users. But in the end, the article is protected and the edition is out. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 07:51, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

The Article of Trains

Hi! It was in the article, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.175.152 (talk) 23:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

cedar creek

the edit I made is satire and should not be taken seriously and as a citizen of cedar creek I can definitively say the cedar creek, Texas is not the happiest place on earth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8080:1C02:4300:D145:864A:1C5A:BDB3 (talk) 00:05, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Keith Buckley

I am his daughter so have updated his details. He passed away this week Fitness With Natasha (talk) 00:21, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fitness With Natasha: You need to support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Please read WP:VERIFY for more information. M.Bitton (talk) 00:27, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

thank you

	being awsome
	thank you i was just toying around Skyrim nord (talk) 23:56, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Source

Hello, Where is the source about arab name of bouïra?--Noname JR (talk) 11:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Same Sex Marriage Bermuda

Hello Apologies re trying to link www.samelovebermuda.com This website was created by a friend who tracked the fight for Same Sex Marriage in Bermuda.

It was me, LionFishBermuda, who started the ball rolling in Bermuda in April 2015 by creating a petition for legalizing Same Sex Marriage in Bermuda. Indeed, I found the lawyer Mark Pettingill who agreed to take on the legal challenge. There were many behind the scenes who helped financially with the long series of court fights leading to SSM being legal in Bermuda. There is of course the final leg to go at the Privy Council.

So I was simply hoping that you would see value in the link to the website Same Love Bermuda... My webmaster is redesigning my website and it was she who posted the link to your WikiPedia page, and from that I was tried to post www.samelovebermuda.com If you do not think it contributes to the information you have (which is amazing) that is your decision. But I would hope you see value in the link!

Here is the section on SSM on my personal website https://tonybrannon.com/WEB_2020/samesexmarriage.html

Best to you. LionFishBermuda (talk) 14:21, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

falsified records

hello, Dr Gail Rosseau is currently working for VES doing veteran C&P evaluations and currently seeing Veterans who are in the C&P process. She has been providing false reports that go against the veteran with multiple inconsistencies in the report. The doctor ignores the actual medical records and the veteran during the exams. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:544:4280:1460:DD80:4BF7:F75E:B63E (talk) 16:16, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Biography information about Liviu Radu

I'm a family member and I know for sure that the fallowing statements are false:

"In 1991 he was kidnapped in New Delhi by Sikh militants. This was done one of the most famous Sikh freedom organisation of that time, namely the Khalistan Liberation Force. They threatened the authorities that if they don’t release Harjinder Singh Jinda, Sukhdev Singh Sukha and Nirmal Singh Nimma, they will kill Radu. These three were Sikh militants of the Khalistan Commando Force who were responsible for the assassination of Arun Shridhar Vaidya, the Indian Army Officer who lead Operation Blue Star. Radu was released unharmed after 49 days."

I would like permission to remove this text from the Wikipedia page.

Thank you, Cristina Radu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.144.209 (talk) 00:16, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

@69.165.144.209: That's not for me to decide. I suggest you first start by checking the cited source. If it doesn't support the statement, remove it and leave an explanation in the edit summary, but if it does, leave a comment on the article's talk page and see what others think. M.Bitton (talk) 00:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Bluelight

I'd say they've given themselves plenty of WP:ROPE for their unblock request. I woudln't worry about trying to engage further. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: I agree. M.Bitton (talk) 01:09, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

John Cass

The BBC Article was misquoted. I fixed that. You reverted it. The other references were not used in the article if you actually bothered to look what you're doing. 2A00:23C8:4384:F00:4B1:7FCB:82D4:AFA7 (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

That's what the edit summary is there for: for the editor who is removing the content and the sources to justify their actions and not leave it for the others to guess why it's been removed. M.Bitton (talk) 23:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I stated in the edit summary the changes I was making. I didn't specify the removal of the sources because it was clear in the article that someone had just appended 3 sources to a sentence that just quotes the BBC article. I hate when people revert my edits when I only do them in good faith. I appreciate you were only trying to do what you thought was best. 2A00:23C8:4384:F00:4B1:7FCB:82D4:AFA7 (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

It's the fact that you didn't explain the removal of the sources that prompted the revert. I also appreciate the fact that you're reciprocating the assumption of good faith. Happy editing! M.Bitton (talk) 23:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Wkbw

You have made a mistake. You don’t live in Buffalo. Wkbw.com and you will see that in the am Buffalo section they said Linda Pellegrino retired. Melanie Camp is the only cohost(although a guy named Jon Summers could take over). She is destined to take over.76.180.56.43 (talk) 23:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Did you read the message that I left on your talk page? M.Bitton (talk) 23:42, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Read this. https://www.wkbw.com/am-buffalo/linda-pellegrino-is-retiring So much for not living in Buffalo-FD76.180.56.43 (talk) 23:50, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I suggest you read the massage again and follow the instructions on how we write about living people. You can always ask for help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Happy editing! M.Bitton (talk) 23:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, M.Bitton! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Linguist111^talk 23:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Your recent reversion of my edits on List of U.S. Army installations named for Confederate soldiers

Can you tell me the reason why you had reverted both of my recent edits on the article List of U.S. Army installations named for Confederate soldiers? I think you were premature to have reverted both of the edits.

In the first edit, I added a reference to a CNN article that the Senate had just voted to overturned the President's veto and the bill had became law. What was deleted was things that had not happened yet when first written, but has since occurred and now redundant, such as The Senate bill still needs to be combined with the House version of the same bill in the United States congressional conference committee before it can be sent to President Trump for his signature or veto.

In the second edit, I had removed legislative procedure material (as it tangential to the main subject of the Wikipedia article) that became not as important after the bill became law. The only reference removed was about might be done in Congress prior to the 2020 President Election that has since occurred.

Please tell me what is wrong with what I had written and I will change it. Thanks. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 23:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@68.50.32.85: The first revert is definitely an accident, sorry about that. The second was the result of a lack of explanation for the source removal. You explanation (above) is reasonable and you're more than welcome to restore both, or I'll do it if you prefer. Happy editing! M.Bitton (talk) 23:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

User:D4rkeRR9

Judging from D4rkeRR9's latest change to your comment on their talk page(which they have been warned about), I believe you should have more than enough to take said editor to AN/I.

I am inclined to report them myself to AN/I, but I am currently up-to-my-elbows in researching the Aq Qoyunlu. If you need any assistance, feel free to ask. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know and for the help offer. I went ahead and reported them, as I can't think of any other way to make them stop. M.Bitton (talk) 15:47, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

BillCat

Block a user named BillCat from editing! We are currently having an edit war and I tried talking to him/her, but he/she threatning to call the police if I would shut up! I need your help! If you need to contact me, instead of the talk page, contact me through email! My email is ! Don't give out my email or any other personal information to BillCat and other users! Please, hurry! Thank You so much for your help! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123Peacock123 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@123Peacock123: I never threatened to "call the police" about you. The warnings I issued are standard Wikipedia warnings. By the way, you should never post your email address anywhere on Wikipedia, as this is a public forum. BilCat (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@BilCat: I have already reported them for edit warring, but now that they throwing baseless accusations around, I will ping an admin who will know what to do. @Drmies: Can you please look into this issue? Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 02:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

That was weird. If they do more of this after their block expires, it's an indef-block. Drmies (talk) 02:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: Thank you. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 02:09, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: Thanks also. Interestingly, an IP made a similar edit to CBS All Access after the block. I hope it isn't 123Peacock123, but they did make a threat to edit logged out. That's not wrong per se, except to avoid a block of course. BilCat (talk) 04:15, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Al-tabari ethnic claim

I already pointed this out on Altabari's talk page, but I also wanted to see your opinion about this issue as you were engaged in reverting some unconstructive edits to the Altabari's article. Reference 3 in the article seems to point to a different conclusion from what is mentioned in the article. More specifically, the following is mentioned in the article cited:

"None of those ancestors can be identified any further (although there seems to be an implication in some of the sources that Kaṯir b. Ḡāleb was a known personality), and about all that can be said about them is that they have Arabic names. However, Ṭabari is never known to have claimed or to have had attributed to him any tribal affiliation and is always called by his regional nesba. He certainly knew some Persian, and his history showed more than a passing interest in subjects concerning his homeland, but that proves little. When he was asked about his ancestry, he was deliberately vague and quoted a verse belittling the importance of such genealogies (Yāqut, Odabāʾ VI, p. 428; see Rosenthal, 1989, pp. 12-13 on the possible moralizing aspect of this anecdote). There is thus no way of knowing for certain whether Ṭabari’s family was native to the Āol region or perhaps arrived with the wave of Muslim colonists after the Abbasid revolution, either as converts or Arab settlers"

It seems that the writer is saying that it was never known what his ethnic background is. However, this article is used to back up the claim that his ethnicity is definitively known. Shouldn't the claim made in the article be rewritten to reflect that there is no consensus at least? Moor919 (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Moor919: Since the Encyclopedia of Islam says more or less the same thing, whether the family was of indigenous stock or descended from Arab colonists in Tabaristan is unknown, I personally don't see why the article shouldn't reflect the uncertainty regarding his ethnicity. M.Bitton (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

California megapolitan areas

Hi M.Bitton. I guess you might not have seen my reply to your post on my talk page regarding my edit to California megapolitan areas. I just added a section on talk:California megapolitan areas expanding on why I believe my edit was necessary. 24.7.24.119 (talk) 04:18, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Now that you have left an explanation on the article's talk page, there is nothing stopping you from being bold again. M.Bitton (talk) 16:35, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Helpful site

Search for books on this site.[10] --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:59, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: I will definitely have a go. Many thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 13:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Regarding The Article 'Mouni Roy'

In personal Life section, It is written that she is going to marry soon, which is Fake rumor. Mouni Roy herself has Denied it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.43.34.73 (talk) 17:56, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

If that's the case, then you'll have no problem finding a source (please read the message that I left on you talk page). M.Bitton (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Empty spaces in infoboxes

Hi M.Bitton, while I'm a big supporter of your mission to remove the annoying empty infobox spaces, I'm afraid that to my understanding you're going to be in a losing war against anyone who edits those articles using the visual editor. CMD (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: I haven't thought about that. I think I'll stop for now and see how much of it will stick. M.Bitton (talk) 16:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Информация о Дмитрие Соине

Добрый день! Дмитрий Соин, просит изменить информацию о нем, не соответствующую действительности: В 1994 году власти Молдовы возбудили уголовное дело в убийстве против Соина, который убил жителя Тирасполя из служебного оружия в заявленном акте самообороны. Соин был объявлен Интерполом в международный розыск в 2004 году. Это информация которая порочит честь и достоинство личности, предлагаю заменить ее на: В 1993—2007 годах работал в органах госбезопасности Приднестровья, последняя должность начальник Управления защиты Конституции. В 2004 году объявлен властями Молдовы в международный розыск по сфабрикованному уголовному делу.

Как это сделать?

Good afternoon! Dmitry Soin, asks to change the information about him that does not correspond to reality. How do I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Сергей Пи (talk • contribs) 16:20, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit to Bacherlotte page

Regarding your message below: "...Hello, I'm M.Bitton. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bachelor party, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)..."

I am a provider of software for Travel Trust Accounts in the UK and have exntensive knowledge on Group Travel over many years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniellanden (talk • contribs) 17:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@Daniellanden: I believe you, but unfortunately, the content that you added is considered original research. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's core content policies and if needed, do not hesitate to ask for help at the Teahouse. Happy editing! M.Bitton (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

USS. John C. Calhoun page

You reverted some changes I made to the USS John C. Calhoun page. I have no citations or sources except for myself. I was there. I was stationed on the Johnny C. from 1991 to decommissioning in 1994. I would not know how to find any sources other than myself and a few fellow crew members that I'm still in touch with. I was going to add when the Panama Canal transit was but I noticed it reverted. The only source I would have for the Canal transit is a citation (award) stating that I went through the Canal and the date that it occurred. How would I go about making these changes?

James Beard (former ET2/SS (nuclear) on SSBN 630 Blue crew and combined crew from October 1991 to March 28, 1994) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.200.80.19 (talk) 05:29, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

NFAC

The NFAC is not a black separatist group. That falsity must be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ButlerW01 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@ButlerW01: That's not my call. You need to start a discussion on the article's talk page and see what the others have to say. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 16:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Sock

Maybe it's time to start an SPI for User:Taha Khattabi, and I'll give you EdDakhla and T.Khattabi. It's more or less pro forma, but they're very much active, as you know. Drmies (talk) 01:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: That's a great idea. What about the blocked IP's, should I list them too? M.Bitton (talk) 16:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, go ahead and list them. You know Checkusers don't link IPs to account, but if you're sure, stick them in there. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies:  Done You'll notice that I left the 2 IPs (one confirmed by Yamla and one blocked by yourself) out since I figured that you already have them on record. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 00:06, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

No no no--put them in. I don't keep a record, unless it's for really unusual cases, and then on the CU-wiki. Plus, my memory is like Swiss cheese, nothing but holes. The record that you are building is there for all the other admins as well. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies:  Done Best, M.Bitton (talk) 01:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: I have added a bit more to it. Please have a look and let me know what you think. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done Drmies (talk) 15:35, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Hafthor

Any EDITS I choose to make on Hafthor Julius Bjornsson have been confirmed by legitimate sources from his team as well as those close to him and I request you authorize every single edit I make on this man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FA49:2101:E00:C1CB:FC9A:BBF7:6269 (talk) 23:58, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you read WP:OR as well as the comments I left on your talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 00:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

"The Queen of the South" Biblical reference

Hi, M. Bitton, it looks like you might be the most recent human to have edited the article "Queen of the South," (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_the_South_(biblical_reference), and I wanted to let someone know that I think the Luke reference misdirects to Luke 10, when it needs to be Luke 11:31. [Sorry if this is not the best way to do this, I have no idea what I'm doing here. Also left a note on a new talk page, which was probably the wrong thing to do.] Best wishes, Heather Thiessen 184.16.161.120 (talk) 13:47, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for letting me know. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 16:37, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Algerian War

You'll have to point me to the RfC. I can't be going through all the talk page archives, and there's nothing more specific in the edit summaries you provided. For the record, unless you make more specific statements in your edit summaries, your case isn't much stronger than the IPs, and you're making it harder for us admins. Drmies (talk) 02:48, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: Here's the infamous RfC. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 22:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: The the IP that you blocked is back, and this time they are IP hopping. I filed an edit warring report and I would be really grateful if you could have a look at it. Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 21:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

The article has been semi-protected by EdJohnston. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 21:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I see--thank you. I blocked that latest IP, because I don't want it to unnoticed that they violated a rule. BTW it's funny that I'm reading this right after typing up a message to a student about Assia Djebar's Fantasia: An Algerian Cavalcade, which details some of the crimes committed against the Algerian people. Drmies (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

@Drmies: Thank you. That's a very strange coincidence indeed. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 23:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Don’t even stress yourself

Take a look at this, they’d invariably get what’s coming their way. Celestina007 (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007: Thanks for letting me know. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 00:04, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Hi M.Bitton, I changed the names of those "Turks in X" articles because they are not recent citizens of Turkey, which "Turks in" can imply. These communities (full or partial origin) have been citizens of these said countries for centuries. Further, this would be in line with X Americans; X Australians; X Canadians; etc. Do you disagree with this? Obviously, my moves are now redirects which is ok. But the current state does imply they are from a modern diaspora, rather than a pre-modern nation-state community (like Bulgarian Turks and Turkish Cypriots etc.). Hope to hear back. Thanks! Sseevv (talk) 21:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Sseevv: Not really, because unlike Turkish, the term "Turk" was used for centuries to simply mean Muslim living in some part of the Ottoman empire. On a side note: those articles are full of nonsense about meaningless partial ancestry and most, if not all of the notable people cited in them are not described by RS as either "Turks" or "Turkish". M.Bitton (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. It's not something I'm going to be strongly pushing for if there is a strong rejection in the Wiki community. But I'll take your comment forward and raise a discussion on the talk pages. It seems more logical, at least to me, that the titles would make clear that these are about citizens of these modern nations states (who either fully or partially identify as Turkish), rather than recent Turkish arrivals who may not obtain the citizenship of the said countries. Ethnicity in the Middle East is a complex subject, as before it would be X-speaking Muslims. But to completely disregard people who self-declare their identities as "nonsense" is worrisome. Sseevv (talk) 22:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Sseevv: Starting a discussion that is centered around what the reliable sources say is a good idea. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 22:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Jackson Crawford page

Hi M. Bitton, I received your message. Apologies, I forgot to enter the reason for changing the references to University of Colorado-Boulder and Crawford's position there: He no longer works there. His appointment ended in May 2020. Please restore the changes to the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.211.253.122 (talk) 23:17, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@71.211.253.122: Since this is a WP:BLP article, I cannot really restore it without citing a reliable source. I hope you understand. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 23:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: He is not listed as faculty on their site: https://www.colorado.edu/gsll/nordic/faculty This is also something he openly talks about on his YouTube channel.

@71.211.253.122: Unless I'm mistaken, on his website he says: "As of 2020 I am a full-time public educator, remaining at the University of Colorado as a Resident Scholar at the Center of the American West". Feel free to add that to the article. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 17:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Libertarian Marxism

Please, I'm trying to remove original research. Complaints of original research have persisted over ten years on the page Libertarian Marxism, but nothing's improved since. The sources cited DO NOT mention the term Libertarian Marxism, and frequently do not even mention libertarian or libertarianism at all! Consult the Talk page before reversing my edits, thanks.

Kind regards, Crashprop

@Crashprop: I appreciate what you're trying to do, that's why I suggested you use the talk page to explain the situation, ideally, citing what the cited sources that I assume you have checked say. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 17:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Quasi-rent page

I made an edit to the page on quasi-rents to include the modern definition of the term. The current page is indecipherable. I recommend you adopt my edit, at least in substance, lest the page remain unusably obscure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.3.232 (talk) 23:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Why don't you improve the article using reliable sources? M.Bitton (talk) 23:09, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't know how to add citations. But I am a PhD student in economics and I am telling you that the current page is unintelligible. (Take a look for yourself--can you really tell me what it means?) It needs to be translated into simple, modern terminology. It is not a complicated concept, but the current page is unreadable. I provided a very simple (and generic) definition for the concept. I'm not going to pursue this further; if you choose to keep the page as-is, then it will remain utterly useless. It's your call. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.3.232 (talk) 23:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

No, it's not my call as Wikipedia's policies are set by the community. As for adding citations, please read this article, it's fairly straightforward, but you're still having difficulties, then feel free to cite the reliable source here and I will add it. M.Bitton (talk) 00:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

thank you

thankyou for the warm welcome i am 100% going to stay all thanks by Helperboi (talk) 16:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Currently online, or automated anti-vandalism bot?

Hello, I noticed that you reversed an edit of mine while I wasn't logged in. Because this occurred almost immediately after the edit, I am curious to know whether you are logged in right now, or whether that was an automated edit by a bot.

Thanks. Walkinxyz (talk)

@Walkinxyz: What edit are you referring to? M.Bitton (talk) 00:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

My guess is that your response answers my question, and both are true. Feel free to correct any misunderstanding on my part. Walkinxyz (talk)

@Walkinxyz: As long as there was no issue with the revert, then all is well that ends well. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 00:28, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I would suggest that you modify the bot to explain that it is, in fact a bot, and that you review the parameters you're using to detect possible vandalism. It was indicated that I should include a description of the edit to avoid triggering suspicion, but I did include a very clear description and the edit was reversed anyway. The edit was on the MKUltra page. In order to prevent chilling of speech, anonymous users should not automatically trigger vandalism suspicion (notably, on an article related to the security state), without a clear and valid reason for that suspicion. All best. Walkinxyz (talk) 00:33, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Walkinxyz: It's not a bot and there was an issue with this edit (see the stray ti). In addition to that, under the guise of research is unsourced. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 00:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I see, not sure how the stray ti slipped in. Thanks for clarifying. "Under the guise of research" is supported by the covert nature of much of the program, and by the very next sentence, "The CIA operated using front organizations…" Walkinxyz (talk) 00:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Walkinxyz: All is well that ends well. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Your recent reverts

I saw that your explanation of the reverts is that the new CIA map is not neutral. Could you provide examples on the map that indicate that your statement is true. Interstellarity (talk) 00:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: The map of Morocco is a prime example. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 00:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm assuming you are talking about Western Sahara. I am familiar with that area. We could possibly discuss editing the map to fix that. Interstellarity (talk) 00:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: Yes, I am referring to Western Sahara. We already have one that is fixed and widely used: the 2016 version. M.Bitton (talk) 00:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I had a second look at the map. The old political map seems to be up to date. The only thing on the map that is not updated (also not updated on the new map) is that Burundi changed its capital. On the old physical map, there are a few things the new map fixes that the old one doesn't.

• Kazakhstan changed the name of its capital from Astana to Nur-Sultan
• Macedonia changed its name to North Macedonia
• Swaziland changed its name (also not fixed on new map)
• Czech Republic adopted the short form Czechia

I hope I provided enough information about the differences between the old and new map except for Western Sahara. I would like to ask, is the inclusion of Western Sahara the main reason why you reverted my changes? For example, for a map to be neutral, it would have to include dotted lines indicating the dispute in which case it doesn't. Kosovo is shown as an independent country. That is not neutral. Abkhazia and South Ossetia are shown as part of Georgia. That is not neutral. In the map, how the map indicates Taiwan is OK since the political status is ambigous. What makes Western Sahara stand out against the rest? Interstellarity (talk) 19:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: Two wrongs don't make a right. Ideally, I would use the UN map, but since the 2016 CIA map has been used for some time now, it is considered stable. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 19:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Corey Feldman

You also belive, that your mother is your father, just why its said in television? Think about it and then youll see the truth. This ist not a bitton to you, this ist a truthon to ya! I know what I am sayin...and thats the only thruth! Nether Jackson nor Sheen. Belive it or you never wont get to Allah! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:1656:4D80:50:D165:154A:EC55 (talk) 21:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Daniel Smokler

Based on your username "M. Bitton" I think you may have, not a COI exactly, but a professional connection to Steven M. Cohen, having published about him etc. Is that correct? It would be best, if so, to request edits related to him on the talk page. Sorry if this is completely wrong!!! GordonGlottal (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@GordonGlottal: No, I don't. I do recall reverting an edit by Daniel_Smokler (the editor who declared a connection with the primary subject). M.Bitton (talk) 16:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

ok NP. I meant that edit, which relates to Cohen also. Different M. Bitton. Happy editing! GordonGlottal (talk) 16:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Updating the information for the University of Alaska Southeast

Hello, I work at the University of Alaska Southeast and have been tasked with updating the Wiki page, which contains very outdated information about the institution. I see some of the changes have been reverted and am wondering if there is a better process that would allow me to make the necessary updates?

Thank you in advance, ACK RainyAK

@RainyAK: Since you acknowledge that you have a conflict of interest while editing Wikipedia, you should click on the first blue link in this message, read the guideline and see whether it applies to you. Pay particular attention to the portions pertaining to paid editing. Having said that, what happened here is that M.Bitton is running a program called Twinkle. It detected that you removed content containing a citation to a reliable source. At least that's how it appears on the surface, because Twinkle is very black and white in the way it operates. For starters, the external link to the cited story is dead and has been for years. When Morris Communications owned the Juneau Empire, they had a practice of making extensive story archives available on the newspaper's website. When they sold the paper, that all went away. We should assume good faith that this is still a valid source, since it was formatted correctly and its validity can be researched. You contend that it's "outdated". This is not a valid argument: we are here to present the history of UAS, not to serve as a social media mirror for whatever agenda the university is currently pushing. The problem I see is that the section uses the mere existence of a reliable source to promote undue weight to one particular viewpoint. This viewpoint overwhelms the section to the point where it is no longer an accessible overview of UAS athletics. This can be partially rectified by combining this section with the previous section on the recreation center, since the two functions are closely related, as well as making some attempt to represent the overall history of athletic endeavors at UAS. The article as a whole is light on high-quality sources and heavy on thinly-veiled promotional language. An example: "the Ketchikan campus offers small class sizes, face-to-face classroom experiences, a large selection of online courses as well as blended face-to-face and online classroom experiences, and staff and advisors. The Ketchikan campus is a leader in the State university system for online degree offerings including the only interdisciplinary Bachelor of Liberal Arts and Bachelor of Arts, Social Science." I don't see why it needs to be pushed further in that direction. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 04:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@RainyAK: Please see the welcome message that I left on your talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 22:28, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

CORRECTION REGARDING BHATI REGION IN BARO BHUIYAN

Hello Mr Bitton, thanks for messaging me. First of all, I would like to inform you that I am editing Wikipedia for a long time, and I generally dont experiment. I had edited the Bhati part of Baro Bhuiyan article based on what is given in Banglapedia, the national encyclopedia in Bangladesh. If you read the whole description, you will find at the end of the description that it does not include Jessore. You have pasted portions of the Banglapedia description in Wikipedia, but not the whole part. I think this proves what I had done was right. Anirban KolkataAnirban Kolkata (talk) 19:18, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

You have pasted portions of the Banglapedia description in Wikipedia I did no such thing and the comment that I left on your talk page was about you removing content from Baro-Bhuyan without adequately explaining why. M.Bitton (talk) 20:26, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Correction regarding Bhati region in Baro Bhuyan

        Mr Bitton, I have corrected the fault that was there in Bhati region portion of Baro Bhuyan article in Wikipedia. My explanation for the correction is the information that is present in Banglapedia article regarding the same matter. I would like to inform you that I am editing Wikipedia articles for a long time and I generally correct mistakes, and dont remove materials from Wikipedia. Please read the Bhati region portion in the Banglapedia article, and then think what I had done was wrong or not. Anirban Kolkata 13:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anirban Kolkata (talk • contribs)  

Anirban Kolkata Anirban Kolkata (talk) 22:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

G Dhananjayan Page Edits

Hi Bitton,

Apologies for not giving a clear explanation of the changes made to the page. But the changes I did were based on the notice given by the person whom the page is about. Hope my changes will be restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8E81:1570:5027:1DCB:26D5:1F0A (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by "notice given by the person"? M.Bitton (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC) Hello M.Bitton, may you write an article on pluripotential theory?

Arabic numerals Wiki

Hi M. Bitton, Could you kindly explain how a Brittanica approved name is not significant and does not deserve to be at the top? https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hindu-Arabic-numerals Also please come to a consensus before just undoing edits. Edit warring goes both ways :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackCape24 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Like I said in the edit summary, they do not belong in the lead because they are not "significant alternative names". The image you referred to in your edit summary is irrelevant because as someone has already pointed out to you, the article is not about the system, it's about the numerals that the system uses. You are on the verge of breaking the 3rr rule, so I suggest you seek consensus for your change. M.Bitton (talk) 21:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

You are wrong

I had put a part in Skanderbergs Revolt and it did have reliable sources AS the sources were from W I k i p e d I a. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LarpoArpo (talk • contribs) 14:55, 22 April 2021‎ (UTC)

Please read the welcome message that I will leave on your talk page. It will have some links that will hopefully help you understand how Wikipedia works. M.Bitton (talk) 23:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

question about your last edits in ottoman algeria

Hi M. Bitton,

First I want to ask you about the demographic estimations here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1015443905 (sorry but I am using mobile version). You stated that the population was estimated between 3 and 5 millions. But zat the same time the link you shared https://books.google.tn/books?id=yEvQZ7bdybgC&pg=PA11&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false it clearly says

ces estimations varient entre 1 et 3 millions

. Only the tge section of " le lendemain du conquête" more than 3 millions population were estimated. Also the table in page 14 and 15 confirms that there is no estimation of more than 3 millions was expected.

Is it a typo or am I missing something ?

Second the map you putted in the page kind of irritates me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Algeria#/media/File:Regency-of-Algiers-1824.jpg I have no problem with old historical maps but I think they don't fit as the main image of the page (wich would be the most vosoted image in the whole page) First this imgae is about all of north africa a'd I would prefer a more algeria centered map (so that the reader won't be misleaded) other than that the colors are pales are pale and the resolution is far from perfection (you can merely read city names).

Now about the content of the map, it also doesn't feel as the best. For example I never recall the region of tafilalet as being part of the refency of algiers. It even contradicts the well sourced paragragh in the description

the Regency originally extended its borders from La Calle in the east to Trara in the west and from Algiers to Biskra

. Plus you know how the maps from the 19th century may differ a lot because their lack of precision. We have plenty of them and chosing one over the other won't be easy that's why I would prefer a newer made one.

I hope you could find a better suited map or at least restore the older one

Note : I would never discard o revise your edits without your approval as I myself consider it vandalism to just remove other efforts by removing it with just one click. That's why I would wait for your response. Thank you Fyhgfthj (talk) 04:46, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

It's not a typo. If you check the cited source you'll see the pages (11 to 16) that the reader is meant to read for verifiability. That map ended up there because some editors kept changing the old map under the pretext that it's not properly sourced. I don't expect to find a map that everyone approves of and I don't see a major issue with the current one, which is sourced and keeping the disruptive editors at bay. M.Bitton (talk) 20:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

thank you for your reply

1) yes I just rechecked the demographics and apparently you was right about 1830 I was mislead about tge title " au lendemain de la conquête" and I thought he was only going to discuss the french algeria. But still I feel that the formulation of the sentence is not the best you've written

The population of the Regency of Algiers in 1830 has been estimated at between 3 and 5 million

you've used "has been" wich is in present perfect wich according to this site https://www.ef.com/wwen/english-resources/english-grammar/present-perfect/ means

An action or situation that started in the past and continues in the present

but I don't feel that really the book of kamel kateb (2001) could really be called "written in the past". So I would prefer a more accurate verion like "the population was estimated between 1 and 3 million but kamel kateb suggests that the number should be raised to 3 to 5 millions" or at least simply write " is estimated between 3 and 5 millions by kamel kateb" (as to indicate that there are other estimations)

2) I checked a little bit the page history and I didn't see a real edit war. It was only the edit Ali ahmed andalousi (talk · contribs) who changed the map. Wich even though it is clearly a troll, still he putted a real sourced historic map just like yours. And that's why I told I didn't like old maps because they can differ way to much from one to another with way many inaccuracies.So for example what would make you prefer your map rather than andalousi's map is it because algeria looks way bigger (cause I don't see any difference between both in historical point of view) If I would chose between old maps I would suggest this one https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:1829_Lapie_Map_of_the_Eastern_Mediterranean,_Morocco,_and_the_Barbary_Coast_-_Geographicus_-_Barbarie-lapie-1829.jpg (wich you already put but later discarded) What I like about this map is that it has more resolution than the other one. It is more accurate. Algeria is slightly more centered. And it is sourced. Another suggestion would be this map https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Algiers_Eyalet,_Ottoman_Empire_(1609).png#mw-jump-to-license I like this map because it indicates the ottoman empire in an article called ottoman algeria. But most importantly it matches up other maps about the ottoman empire. I hope that you've got my point of view. Thank you Fyhgfthj (talk) 14:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC) @M.Bitton:

Actually, I saw your response and ignored it because I don't appreciate you personally attacking another editor on my talk page (by calling them a troll) and then pinging them to make sure they read it. The text is fine and so is the map (though I'm working on an svg version of it). If you failed to see the edit war, just like you failed to see the numbers, then there isn't much I can do to help you. M.Bitton (talk) 23:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Do you know that I meant by troll the edit of ali ahmed andalosi ? (Not the user the edit) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1010843295 . you can even see it throughout his description of the edit

There is nothing like an Antique Map !!!

. You really need to take some rest and chill out. I am not attacking anyone and I would never think about attacking anyone on the internet . You have all my respect man Fyhgfthj (talk) 06:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Incrdiblehumans87

As you are familiar, could you submit the SPI?14:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra: They have already been confirmed and indefed by Maxim. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 14:30, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Inquiry / Enquiry

"'Enquire', and the associated noun 'enquiry', are more common in British English, while 'inquire' and 'inquiry' are more common in American English. In Australia, we use either spelling although enquire and enquiry for the general sense of 'ask', and inquire and inquiry for a formal investigation, is preferred." [11] Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: You learn something new every day. I have always used it the way Australians do as it seems to make more sense. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 22:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

And as an American, I always saw and used "inquiry" until I came across across the alternate in reading works by British authors. As you say, YLSNED. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

"Louvre map"

Hi M.Bitton. Wanted to give you a heads up in relation to this map, apparently created by the Louvre,[12] which you removed from numerous articles here on Eng.Wiki. Although I had tagged it on Commons due to it being packed with dozens of fallacies and stuff contradicted by dozens of reliable sources, the same uploader has removed my tag, calling it "this is a modern-day academic work" [13] Although Commons has its own set of rules, which protects the map from being deleted there even though its packed with errors, it simply does not belong on Wikipedia as its inclusion—indeed—violates numerous WP policies. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:41, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Of course that piece of garbage does not belong on Wikipedia, it goes without saying. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 23:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

IP

In case you were curious or have an input, I opened up a ANI regarding that IP. Curbon7 (talk) 14:05, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Western Sahara

Hi M.Bitton. Could you give me a reasonable explanation why did you revert/undo my changes in Western Sahara and why is it not accepted ? 14:06, 11 June 2021‎ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morrocan (talk • contribs)

It's not accepted because of the unjustified/unjustifiable content removal. M.Bitton (talk) 16:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Nothing got removed and I did give a justification, let me make it clear to you, I just changed the sentence order to give visibility who actually controls the territory. I don't understand or see your vandalism accusation. Morrocan (talk) 18:45, 11 June 2021

That's not true (you did remove some content), and besides, there is no reason whatsoever to change the sentence order. M.Bitton (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Union Council of Ministers

I see you reverted some content removal.[14] Unfortunately you don't seem to have noticed Narendra Modi Official Singh man tattu Chand pandey had also vandalized the article (and, I think, had gone on to reinsert their vandalism from several IPs). Just thought I'd mention it. Bishonen | tålk 15:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Thanks for letting me know. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 17:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Deliberate Lefty Slant to GB News

the whinging left has slighted the GB News which has the ethos of being neutral and 'reporting the news' instead of the usual lefty twitter tripe we always have to see.

So please see the following citations which indemnify your biased and left leaning introduction to the news channels.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1449320/BBC-news-GB-News-public-events-footage-launch-day-Sunday-gb-news-channel-launch https://foxhole.news/2021/02/08/stop-funding-hate-tries-to-shut-down-gb-news-before-its-even-launched/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/06/13/bbc-hit-ofcom-complaint-gb-news-shutting-broadcaster/ https://j4mb.org.uk/2021/06/12/bbc-accused-of-attempting-to-shut-out-gb-news-at-11th-hour/ https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1446447/Andrew-neil-boris-johnson-voting-poll-Yougov-keir-starmer-dominic-cummings https://www.tomwinnifrith.com/articles/17677/the-left-still-doesnt-understand-free-speech-tries-to-shut-down-gb-news-before-its-first-broadcast https://davidicke.com/2021/02/15/woke-anti-hate-censors-attempt-to-shut-down-gb-news-before-its-even-gone-to-air/

And all this before the programme even aired. The left is the new right and I am disgusted that my legitimate edit was removed. Because it is the 'left' who are 'tarring this news channel' and the left who has become the new far right. The author has written bigoted one dimensional claims and slants and refuses to accept the findings in the 7 references I have given and believe me there are another 300+ I can lay my hands on.

Fix it and put the edit in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.69.173.116 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

The introduction to the news channel that you're describing as biased and left leaning is not mine. 2) Your edit has been reverted because it's unsourced. M.Bitton (talk) 17:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

College Football Hall of Fame.

Hello,

Thank you for reaching out. I apologize I am new to editing on Wikipedia. I work for the College Football Hall of Fame.

I have been tasked with uploading our new logo and making a minor edit to the copy on the helmet wall.

What's the best way to go about doing this?

Thank you,

Jeremy Swick - Historian & Curator — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jswick214 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jswick214: It looks like you have managed to add the logo. Since you have a conflict of interest, I will leave a comment on your talk page that will explain what to do in this case. Thank you for your honesty. M.Bitton (talk)

Bill Zimmerman (activist)

See article's talk page. The editor is the subject and has apparently removed the COI tag previously from the article, which I readded (before I realized it had been removed). S0091 (talk) 20:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@S0091: I saw it, that's why I didn't bother leaving a warning/comment on their talk page. Thanks for letting me know. M.Bitton (talk) 20:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

They have posted a note at the Teahouse so will see what happens. Also, thanks for all the work you do around here. I have seen you around pretty much since I started and I am certain I have learned a thing or two from you just by noticing how you have handled something. S0091 (talk) 21:02, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@S0091: Now that the article is being watched, they have no choice but to follow the rules. Thank you very much for the encouragement and for your valuable contributions to the project that I have witnessed numerous times. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 22:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Meaghan Oppenheimer edit

I changed the article to represent that Meaghan is a former child actor, not currently an actor. This is based off of multiple interviews she has given, as well as tweets. [15][16][17] — Preceding unsigned comment added by KnowingThings39 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

@KnowingThings39: You removed the fact that she's an actress despite what the sources that you cited above say. Care to explain why? M.Bitton (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

RACE FOR LIFE

We organised the first race but seem to have been overlooked! Any communications I had back at that time will have since been thrown away . Suggest you ask for more verification from Race for Life Cancer Research office! Shame after all this time not to be recognised for what we did — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.28.238.8 (talk) 19:24, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

RACE FOR LIFE

I found an article that was printed in Running Magazine that mentions my Race Director role. I have taken pictures can I send them to you please86.28.238.8 (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

That's not how Wikipedia works (please read WP:VERIFY). That being said, there's nothing preventing you from asking for help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. M.Bitton (talk) 18:22, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Sultans of Morocco

My friend why are you removing things that ive added, since they dont have any pic ive added their flag Rayooni (talk) 22:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Rayooni: "Not having pics" is not a valid excuse to add any image. Please read MOS:IMAGES. M.Bitton (talk) 22:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Change to Digging Roots

Good evening

The change I made were legitimate as I am the band's manager. How can we put these back in place ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.32.59 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Please read the guideline about conflict of interest that I will leave on your talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 21:46, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Arabs article

Hello, could you intervene on the Talk of the Arab article? I think it is necessary to currently solve the problem. Thanks BaylanSP (talk) 17,14, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the Talk. As your proposal is the only one that has generated some consensus compared to the current Lead, I would like to ask your permission to be able to use it when editing the Lead, specifically this one:

"The Arabs [...] are the largest ethnic group in the Arab world. The Arab diaspora is established around the world in significant numbers, in [...]"

Regards. BaylanSP (talk) 10:08, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@BaylanSP: You don't need my permission to use what I proposed, but given Grandpallama's objection (that I still don't quite understand), I'd rather give them the opportunity to properly explain their reasoning. M.Bitton (talk) 15:40, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

M.Bitton, it's certainly not my effort to stonewall, but I don't think I saw consensus to just remove all the detailed mentions; all of the discussion I had seen was around being careful what we characterize as the Arab world, and making sure the sentences were constructed in a way that didn't misidentify countries. I'm not enthused that this was taken as an excuse to peel out the mention of those nations with a particular history, which I didn't (yet) see consensus for. To be frank, I suspect I would find your arguments far more compelling than that of a month-old account who was just warned for edit warring across WP. Grandpallama (talk) 16:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@Grandpallama: I haven't seen anything that would lead me to believe that you're stonewalling or that we can't reach a consensus (whatever that may be) after examining everyone's perspective. M.Bitton (talk) 14:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

False map

Hello M.Bitton. I recently nominated a page on Wikipedia for deletion. Could you give your opinion on the discussion page in question since you are contributor on these kind of topics? Thank you!

[18] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Askelaadden (talk • contribs) 19:42, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

@Askelaadden: You're obviously dealing with another sock of Ifni95. Don't bother with deleting their crap (which doesn't stand a chance of ever being used in an encyclopedia), just make sure they don't mess with your uploads and if they continue to do, report them to the admins. M.Bitton (talk) 21:35, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello @M.Bitton:,

Thank you for your message and your advice!

Have a nice day! --Askelaadden (talk) 08:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Apology

I hope you don't mind that I moved your comment on Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Brahim_Ghali to follow the other editor's sig. It was hard to follow otherwise. Schazjmd (talk) 23:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: Actually, you did me a favour as I didn't know exactly which part to reply to without refactoring their comment. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 23:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Map of Ottoman Algeria

Hello M.Bitton,

I saw that you removed the user-made map of Ottoman Algeria (quite efficiently, I'll add) in favor for the older map. I have to call into question your logic for doing so. The map you favor is an excerpt from this full map. The map may have been a good "source" in its time, but its clearly outdated, with many nuances of pre-colonial Africa not apparent and the borders inaccurate. Clearly an antiquated and outdated map from the 19th-20th century should not be put above a user made map with more focus and attention to detail to the actual topic of the article. As for the sources of the map, I'm contacting the author at present for a list of them.

Thank you

MarsandCadmium (talk) 19:24, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

@MarsandCadmium: That map was added to prevent an edit war. It's sourced and there are many other sources that support it. Personally, I don't see an issue with, especially considering who it was made by and the fact that its date is very appropriate (few years before the French invasion). M.Bitton (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

@M.Bitton:. Hi M.Bitton I guess you remember me from my last discussion with you wich was about the same reason https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:M.Bitton#question_about_your_last_edits_in_ottoman_algeria.

That map was added to prevent an edit war

Seeing the update history of ottoman algeria page I can easily conclude that one map did everything but avoiding edit wars. In fact it created them with 50 % of the last edits are just some editors suggesting to user other maps, but all of them were reverted only by you every single time, wich really make me doubt the consensus on that map. As I told you before being sourced by a well known author in the 19th century is not that special. There are billions of "barbary coast" maps from the 19th century, that you can chose from but you only have chosen the one that it's fidelity and accuracy is a bit trickey. My request for using pierre lapie's map from 1829 https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:1829_Lapie_Map_of_the_Eastern_Mediterranean,_Morocco,_and_the_Barbary_Coast_-_Geographicus_-_Barbarie-lapie-1829.jpg and zoomed on algeria here https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Carte_de_la_régence_d%27Algérie_en_1829_(état_algérien_moderne_vassal_de_l%27empire_ottoman).png is still ongoing. As this map would cause less trouble

With much respect. Thank you for your time spent reading this Fyhgfthj (talk) 15:33, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Nove Rockerfeller

I removed unsourced contentDriftrich (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

No, you removed a source while falsely claiming that sentence was unsourced. M.Bitton (talk) 15:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

changed it Driftrich (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

recent edit on article American Council on Science and Health

Hello,

This is regarding the changes I made on the article American Council on Science and Health calling the person hank campbell for promoting pseudoscience that was reverted by you. I know I didn't provide a source for the changes I made, but that person has promoted many misleading pseudoscientific claims. I only made minor changes.

The person Hank Campbell is described in that article as a science writer but he has promoted pseudoscience and misleading, & false information in the name of 'science'.

He has downplayed/denyed the health risks of secondhand smoke. The website run by him has promoted fake news in the name of 'science' that nobody has died or got lung cancer from second hand smoke here, here and so on,despite the fact that there are well documented cases of deaths occurring from secondhand smoke and as stated in the article health effects of tobacco smoking, about 600000 deaths are caused from secondhand smoke exposure every year, among which 21400 are caused from lung cancer due to second hand smoke. In his blog he says exhausive research found no death from second hand smoke, but the research he cites was from Enstrom and Kabat(a study often cited by pseudoskeptics of dangers of second hand smoke). That study was utter crap and it had multiple fatal flaws and as stated in the passive smoking article, not only was it funded by the tobacco industry, the American cancer society calling the study flawed even pointed out how they misused their data.

He says thirdhand smoke is pseudoscience and says it is only embraced by so called "anti-smoking fundamentalist", but then he attacks the American Association for the Advancement of Science(AAAS) when they tell us about it.

He also promoted doubts about scientific consensus of climate change. He wrote that conservatives are better at understand climate change than liberals, in a blog, despite the fact that most conservatives(not all) strait up deny climate change.

There are many other examples as well. Whatever he doesn't like he dismisses it as pseudoscience or anti-science

He definitely seems to have a political agenda. He is amongst other pseudoscience promoting charlatans like Dr. Oz, Alex Jones, Joseph Mercola, Robert f kennedy jr, Vandana Shiva, patrick moore , mike adams of naturalnews, etc.

That's why I made the edits because he isn't a science writer as written in that article. It wasn't a vandalism.

Also I didn't revert your edit because I didn't want to engage in an edit war so I thought it would be appropriate to contact you directly. So please consider restoring my edit, if you think my edit was correct.

Thank you and have a nice day! 2409:4042:918:CDC1:156E:C78B:4B77:5037 (talk) 13:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I share your concerns, but unfortunately what you wrote about Hank Campbell (a living person) is unsourced (original research to be exact) and therefore violates the rather stringent WP:BLP policy. That being said, there is nothing stopping you from adding to the article the fact that the ACSH has been described as a "one of the most visible, well-funded purveyors of pseudoscience and misinformation".[19] Best, M.Bitton (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I know it would go against WP:BLP but I think it would be better to call him a journalist instead of science writer.

Also in other articles like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., it is stated that he promotes the scientifically discredited link between vaccines and autism, and the article for mike adams of natural news states how he promotes pseudoscience by promoting quack medicine, anti-vax, chemtrail conspiracy theory, anti-fluoridation,etc. So similarly is it possible to state that he promotes pseudoscience by downplaying health risks of secondhand smoke and disputing scientific consensus on climate change? 2409:4042:918:CDC1:DDAD:640D:5E:4E9C (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Since I'm not familiar with him, I have no idea what RS call him. If in doubt or what he does is disputed, remove it from the article (which isn't about him to start with). M.Bitton (talk) 17:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I removed him from the article,as the article isn't about him. Even I'm not really familiar with him but I came across some of his articles on his website. At the beginning I thought he was cool, cause he called out quacks like Mercola, dr Oz,and others, but then he when I came across other article where he denied health risks of second hand smoke,by using a fraudulent study funded by tobacco industry, and casted doubts on climate change by spreading one sided propoganda, I realised even he had a political agenda. It's like "I don't like this so it's pseudoscience/anti-science."

But it is very clear he is spreading misinformation himself as he said nobody has died from second hand smoke which is clearly a lie, as around 600000 deaths occur every year due to second hand smoke exposure. Now the numbers may not be accurate but to say nobody has got lung cancer or died from second hand smoke is straight up a lie as there are many well documented cases. 2409:4042:918:CDC1:2241:FC9:98B7:5A1E (talk) 05:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand why you removed what is uncontroversial and easy attributable to a source (please don't do that again). I have restored some of it (left his previous job title out) and added a couple of sources. M.Bitton (talk) 17:31, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought you told me to remove his name entirely as the article is not about him. It's my mistake and I apologise for that.2409:4042:918:CDC1:F91A:52E8:9E5B:811F (talk) 05:34, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

re: Talk Page

Thank you for the welcome and the advice, but I did none of those things listed under Bad Practice. Nothing was deleted or edited. All I did was add a comment agreeing with the original post about the article seeming overly sanitized. I've been doing this for years when I see a comment I agree with, and it's never been an issue. But thank you for your input.

Just in case you miss it (seeing as you're editing under IP), here's the explanation. Happy editing! M.Bitton (talk) 13:33, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the accidental revert

I reverted the warning you gave the IP thats editing the line 3 protests by mistake, apologies. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 14:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC) LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 14:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@LakesideMiners: No worries, these things happen. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Police Special Operations Group

Hello M.Bitton. I'm jawi13. I just saw that you left me warning messages about the youtube links about the article of the police special operations group, but I hadn't seen them until today. I apologize for that. Sincerely

Jawi13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jawi13 (talk • contribs) 14:59, Aug 14, 2021 (UTC)

@Jawi13: Actually, I pinged you with regard to an IP who is targetting all the articles that you created and that I have reported to AN3. Please feel free to join the discussion. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)