User talk:PurpleCat7

An anarchist editor.

Anarchism

Hi PurpleCat7,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 15:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Purple Cat

Welcome to WP! I have seen that you have added some material at history of anarchism. I reverted the additions, but I feel I have to explain why. WP should summarize significant issues from reliable secondary sources. Most of your addition were supported by either no source, or primary source, or non reliable secondary source. There is an abundance of secondary reliable sources available on the net or the WP Library, by academics or established authors that can help improve the articles. Sorry for the reverts, I know it hurts sometimes. Cinadon36 20:22, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cinadon36, I appreciate you reaching out. I'll work on doing better with sources. However, I am curious, is Michael Schmidt's work generally considered unreliable? PurpleCat7 (talk) 01:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Schmidt has some controversial opinions, so whenever we make use of those opinions, they should be attributed. But generally, the name of the author is just one of many factors that we should be taking into consideration when evaluating a source. Other factors are: publishing house, if the source was peer reviewed, whether other peers reviewed his work, year of publication, citations etc. Read more at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Cinadon36 08:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Hello! I'm Nagol0929. Your recent edit(s) to the page Amédée Dunois appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. i wouldnt classify him as an anarchist Nagol0929 (talk) 18:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Asilvering. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. asilvering (talk) 07:42, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CATDEF

Hi, with this edit [1] you undid my earlier revert of your edit to add "anarchist" categories to this biography. Please have a look at the categorization guidelines I've linked here and in my previous edit summary. You're welcome (encouraged!) to add people to these categories if sources consistently refer to them as anarchists, provided that you add references for this if there are none in the article. It doesn't matter what it says on es-wiki or any other language Wikipedia - we need sources in this article. -- asilvering (talk) 03:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PurpleCat7 I see you are still adding people to categories that are not supported by sources in the article. Sometimes you don't give much of an edit summary, sometimes you do (eg [2]); however, it's not the edit summary or some other article that needs to contain the information and a source, but the article you're adding to the category. If a book describes someone as an anarchist, please do write that into the article, cite it, and add the category. I've managed to do this for a few of the people you've added to French anarchists. But for most of them, I can't. -- asilvering (talk) 23:11, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most importantly, the standard for adding a biographical category to an article is higher than one person making the connection on another article (WP:COPDEF). It needs to be a defining characteristic commonly and consistently associated with the subject. Usually if it would not warrant mention in the lede, it is probably not "defining". czar 13:03, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just spent a while removing a bunch of categories they've added, because they had claimed any anarchist whose circumstances of death were even remotely unclear as "murdered". I now have a headache and need to lie down. @PurpleCat7: if you read this, please take more care about making sure the categories you add are backed up by reliable sources cited in the article. If you know of some, consider adding to the article itself rather than just adding a category without explanation. Careless category spamming just gives more work to your Wiki-colleagues. --Grnrchst (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, these comments are making me give up on this and I'm never logging into this account again. I'm sorry for causing you a headache but I was trying to improve people's access to information on anarchism and the anarchist movement. Something that has been systematically misrepresented. Additionally, the Anglophone bias of anarchist Wikipedia editors is something I've found deeply disturbing.

So, consider this a victory! You've pushed me off Wikipedia. PurpleCat7 (talk) 04:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't improving anyone's access to information if you don't include the source of the information. That is all you're being asked to do: to cite your work. (And while I'm here... of all the people to accuse of Anglophone bias, Grnrchst is not your guy.) -- asilvering (talk) 05:04, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is trying to push you off Wikipedia. We're trying to hold you to the same basic standard of verifiability that everyone is held to on Wikipedia, ourselves included. If you don't feel like you can continue editing after being asked to cite sources, then that is a real shame. I'm sorry to hear that and wish you the best in your other projects, but I do hope that you can get over this hurdle and continue to contribute.

As for anglophone bias, if you'd be up to point me to how you think this is negatively affecting the project and where you think we can improve, I'd be more than happy to hear from you. Countering systemic bias is important to me and I want to make sure we're doing what we can on that front. -- Grnrchst (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Malaysian anarchists

A tag has been placed on Category:Malaysian anarchists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Malaysian anarchists

A tag has been placed on Category:Malaysian anarchists indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 27 March 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) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]