User talk:MasterTriangle12

Archives found here.

Contentious topic alert

You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. ––FormalDude (talk) 09:15, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PragerU edit

Hey MasterTriangle12, I was about to revert this edit [1] but thought I would ask you about it instead. I think I get what you are going for here as there is more to a "university" than just holding classes and granting degrees. However, I don't agree with, "...does not perform any functions...". Educating people by discussing topics is clearly their intent even if some of the information is disputed. So in that regard they are doing something we expect of any school/university. Do you think there is an alternative text that would work? I feel like the original text was fine but figured I would ask rater than just revert. Springee (talk) 16:14, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, good point. I was wanting to replace the list of things and remove the implication that they might not be meeting the definition on just a technicality. There's a bit of nuance in that their intent is to convince rather than to inform but using an intent-based definition of education is getting a bit pedantic. I was going to say a modification could be "..., aside from producing videos, does not perform any functions of a university", at least until I remembered they make "study guides", which although often considered as just a vehicle for their ideology is at least on the face of it an educational resource, so I might just revert that for now, not sure if I'll come up with something better. (Addendum: I just took a browse through one of their study guides thinking they might have employed more subtlety in the messaging but wow a lot of it is some CCP-level propaganda, just plainly stating the conclusion that you SHOULD come to when thinking about some contentious political issue pulled straight from the culture war, then telling you to write down a justification for why you should come to the conclusion that they gave you based on the talking points that were just provided in their video, if you know anything about how indoctrination is performed in a pseudo-academic setting this is one of the core methods). MasterTriangle12 (talk) 06:45, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked at any of their material much beyond some of the earlier videos on YT. I like that they often present a different POV but it's not good if they are telling you how you should interpret that POV. Springee (talk) 11:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, some of their videos are actually decent, particularly ones on less contentious topics, but even the ones where they are explicitly pushing the ideology can be interesting to analyse the messaging from if you want some insight on current right-wing discourse and talking points, and the sources they use tend to get quoted all over the place even if they don't demonstrate the point being claimed (or demonstrate the opposite lol), so it's a good place to keep an eye on. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 20:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sponge bomb

Hi MasterTriangle12, thanks for the link to the bogus "sponge bomb". Wish that you had included that link in your November 10 deletion. Seems like, by now, there should be a reliable source video of an actual sponge bomb out there somewhere. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 21:06, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I regret not putting a bit more detail in first time, since it's not exactly obvious from that video, and looks somewhat how you could expect a device like that to work. I'm really surprised there isn't any other info by now too, maybe it just hasn't permeated into English sources yet, but I guess the IDF is fairly disciplined when it comes to sharing strategic stuff so it might just not be available yet, I feel like they wouldn't want Hamas to know about it beforehand since there could be some ways to prepare for it. More info about it and images might actually come from Palestinian or even Hamas sources first. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 05:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Sky burial, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 09:54, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good, was hoping someone else could source, I should have just mentioned it on the talk page instead. That article could do with some work, it seems a page on the general practice was merged with a page on the Tibetan practice and it is now unclear what is general or specific to the Tibetan practice. It might be worth returning it to being Tibetan-specific and relying on excarnation as the root page, but I am not familiar enough to make a strong recommendation. EDIT: After reading through everything I see it is exclusively about the Tibetan practice, but is not titled as such and the exclusivity has to be inferred from reading further. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 20:28, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know why that page not titled "Tibetan Sky Burial"? I feel like I'm missing something, since the term is typically used more generally. Is it used more exclusively in an academic context? MasterTriangle12 (talk) 20:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]