Jump to content

User talk:Thismess

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Although some prefer welcoming newcomers with cookies, I find fruit to be a healthier alternative.

Hello, Thismess, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.



Why can't I edit some particular pages?
Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.
Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?
Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.
How do I create an article?
See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.
How do I create citations?
  1. Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
  2. Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
  3. In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
  4. Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
  5. Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
  6. In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
  7. If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?
A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

See also

[edit]

Please stop spamming see also links. Such links should be used sparingly, and certainly not placed in every article imaginable. I am reverting those you've applied to articles on living people, since the see also is by nature unreferenced, and by placing the links you're making an unacceptable unreferenced assertion about a living individual. Acroterion (talk) 02:56, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am listing Categories, not see also links, and they are all sourced and described in the articles. Thismess (talk) 02:59, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you're right, they're categories. However, spamming categories like that in biographies is equally problematic, for somewhat different reasons, mainly having to do with undue emphasis and the tangential nature of applying a category concerning a concept to a person. Think of how it displays when that category is examined. It should not contain names, or at best it would have a subcategory containing prominent adherents. Please get consensus for this kind of thing, rather than just pasting it everywhere. Acroterion (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So there is another standard for the category I added than other categories? People are listed as part of all other types of categories based on their political views, including conspiracy theories. Thismess (talk) 03:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a good practice. Categories should be narrowly framed, and there should be sufficient emphasis within the subject of the article to warrant a category, not just a tangential or minimal mention. If you're going to put categories concerning controversial topics into biographies, you should have a solid understanding of the biographies of living persons policy first. You've been seriously editing for a whole week. You should exercise great caution with categories like that. Acroterion (talk) 03:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please look at wp:BLPCAT Springee (talk) 11:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Springee. That sums it up nicely. That someone else inappropriately categporized people does not justify doing more of it. Acroterion (talk) 12:58, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization

[edit]

Thanks for your efforts in working on categorization. Before you move forward, please make sure you understand WP:CATSPECIFIC. You're adding categories as if they were "tags" when they should be viewed are hierarchies. Here's an example: On London Forum (far-right group), you added the category Category:Neo-Nazi organisations in the United Kingdom, which makes sense. However, the article already existed in Category:White nationalism in the United Kingdom, which is a parent category a couple of levels up from what you added, so it should be removed. And while you're on an article, it's a good idea to review the other categories while you're there. On the same example page, Category:Antisemitism in the United Kingdom could have been removed as the article is already in the subcategory Category:Holocaust denial in the United Kingdom. ButlerBlog (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I shall be a bit more careful and take that into consideration. Thanks Thismess (talk) 22:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While you are here I would like to take the opportunity to call attention to something that has annoyed me while working on these categories, namely the various categories in Category:White nationalism in Europe. The various categories here typically show up between other relevant categories, but the problem is that this concept of white nationalism actually doesn't exist in countries other than US/UK/Can/Aus/SA (in European countries the relevant concept is the various Ethnic nationalisms), yet such articles have been made by someone for several countries. The very few articles that have been put arbitrarily in these categories don't even reference "white nationalism" in any way, and only take up unnecessary space. So I would propose to have these categories deleted (except for the said countries). I could perhaps start by removing the categories from the articles where they have been arbitrarily placed without any sourced content. Thismess (talk) 05:32, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're probably right to start with articles where it seems more arbitrary. One of the problems is that people tend to overcategorize - so that may be part of the issue. Proposing deletion may be a good idea (and I wouldn't discourage it at all in appropriate circumstances), but because of the sensitivity of the issue, people don't always think about it rationally, so I would expect some opposition to emerge. But if you're really digging into the proper categorization, you should be able to build consensus based on that. You're on the right track because the article's content needs to support its categorization, so that's the best place to start. Don't hesitate to reach out if you want/need additional input (if it's on this same thread, just ping me here with {{ping|Butlerblog}}, seeTemplate:Reply to for how to ping a specific user). ButlerBlog (talk) 00:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

[edit]

Hello, Thismess,

It is not appropriate to remove all of the contents of a category so that it gets tagged CSD C1 and is deleted. That is called "emptying categories out of process" and is considered disruptive editing. If you believe a category should be deleted, renamed or merged, please make a nomination at Categories for Discussion, make your proposal and argument for deletion and see if your fellow editors agree. A consensus decision could affect other categories beyond the ones you are nominating. It's better to deal with a group of similiar categories together than handling them one-by-one because categories exist in a hierarchy.

If you continue to empty categories out of process, be aware that your edits may be reverted. If you're going to continue to work with categories, please familiarize yourself with CFD, look at some of the recent nominations and discussions there and consider making your own proposals. Your argument might prevail and a CFD decision can result in a formal decision enforcing that decision while your current way of operating can result in another editor just reverting all of your work because they disagree with your stance. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be a bit more specific which category there was a problem with? Thismess (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I see what it was (I don't know how all the processes work), I got a bit eager there, I won't do it again. Thismess (talk) 01:46, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022-10 counterjihad

[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia's counterjihad studies.

You already know several good sources about the counterjihad movement. FYI there is a 2021 book by Reza Zia-Ebrahimi which one chapter is about the Eurabia conspiracy-theory, only in french-language currently: Antisémitisme et Islamophobie Une histoire croisée

There is a 2011 book by Øyvind Strømmen, in norvegian-language: Det mørke nettet. om høyreekstremisme, kontrajihadisme og terror i Europa

There is a Wikipedia personal essay: Wikipedia:Yes. We are biased. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 07:02, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing categories...

[edit]

...which are defining characteristics of the subject. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Defining characteristics? You could add these articles in tons of upwards categories then, fill everything up, but somehow they aren't except for the few articles I tried to fix, because I was under the impression that articles should only be in subcategories as they usually are. Thismess (talk) 23:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What it looks like you attempted to do is to water down the categorization of right-wingers, Nazis, Klan members and anti-Semites so that they didn't look so bad. If an article says that someone is X, Y, and Z, then they should be in categories X, Y, and Z, even if someone creates a new category A that includes them. Some cats propagate, some do not. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:28, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are only a very few articles that are not categorized like I tried to do. If you want to add every category that could possibly fit an article you have a massive job to do. Or are we not supposed to have rules and standards? Somehow a few select articles are just supposed to stay a categorizational mess in stray categories where they have no place? Reverting other users edits based off on completely unsubstantiated personal allegations and feelings is a very bad policy btw. Thismess (talk) 23:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: Following Wikipedia's existing guidelines on categorization does not water down the categorization as Categories are not meta tags and should not be treated as such regardless of whether the article subject is contentious or not. Your view on categorization violates this guideline (specifically, If an article says that someone is X, Y, and Z, then they should be in categories X, Y, and Z is "tagging", not "categorizing"). @Thismess' edits are correct in this regard - at least on the articles I looked at. ButlerBlog (talk) 03:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:ALLINCLUDED. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: WP:ALLINCLUDED is for non-diffusing - which is not what these are. ButlerBlog (talk) 03:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Any interpretation of categorization rules which results in Neo-Nazis being removed from the category intended to include all Neo-Nazis is wrong. Same for Holocaust deniers, Klan members, and the other categories that Thismess was whitewashing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But that's just the point - they're not being removed from the category. The entire subcategory exists in the parent (or grandparent). That's how categorization works. Your reference to WP:ALLINCLUDED shows a misunderstanding of the guideline because not a single one of these is {{allincluded}}, nor is a non-diffusing category. ButlerBlog (talk) 03:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: @Butlerblog: This issue really needs to be resolved because if it's not I am suddenly effectively banned from cleaning up the categorization of Wikipedia articles. Thismess (talk) 16:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I've noted above: WP:ALLINCLUDED applies to non-diffusing categories and these are not non-diffusing categories. Categories are to go to the most specific as they are hierarchies, not meta tags.
Just to be clear, while I certainly validate BMK's feelings on this, it's still a misunderstanding of how categorization works within Wikipedia. Some sites use tags; we use hierarchies. Taking information out of the article itself is whitewashing; proper hierarchical categorization is not. (To make sure I'm clear, taking it out of the current tree altogether would be whitewashing; but that's not what is happening here.) Our guidelines on categorization are clear on these points.
If you accept WP:BRD as the option, you can wait for a response from BMK - and that would be the ideal. But BRD is not required; there are alternatives (WP:BRB), especially if WP:STONEWALLING prevents moving forward. (BMK is fairly busy with a large mess that has nothing to do with this, so it's possible he may not get around to this discussion.)
Moving forward, here are my suggestions:
  • Make sure that the changes are correct - subcats must exist directly in the tree, not as a crossover.
  • Maybe start only with direct children (not grandchildren or further).
  • Make sure edit summaries are clear on the reason for the change.
  • Maybe pick up where you left off and come back to the other articles later. ButlerBlog (talk) 18:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is obviously a clear guideline about this so I am in the right here. What I probably could have done better is to cite the specific subcat in the edit summary, and if I supplement with a reference to the guideline as well there should be no case for reverting my edits. In any case, I'll probably wait a little while before I start editing those articles again. Thismess (talk) 22:46, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Some additional considerations:
  • You (or me, or someone) should consider whether some of the involved categories should be non-diffusing, and then templated as such (although, make sure you understand what a non-diffusing subcategory is first). An example of a possibility would be Category:Neo-Nazi politicians in the United States or Category:American Nazi Party members as a non-diffusing subcategory of Category:American neo-Nazis. Personally, I don't think this particular example is warranted because the Nazi association is obvious (and I don't think I would support it in a discussion). However, I use it as an example because both of the sub-categories are terminal; in other words, they are a subset of the parent, and there is no further child below them. That being said, it is clear (to me, at least) that an example like Category:American neo-Nazis is not non-diffusing of Category:American Holocaust deniers as (1) the child is not terminal (there are many continuing subcategories beyond it), and (2) the parent is a defining characteristic, which ironically BMK used as the reason for non-diffusing. The fact that something is a defining characteristic leans more towards it being a diffusing subcategory rather than the other way around.
  • Similar to the above, some of these categories should be considered to be specifically labeled as diffusing (the exact opposite of the above). Category:American white supremacists and Category:Far-right politics in the United States already are, but others may need to be as well. FTR, all categories can generally be assumed to be diffusing, even without the specific template simply by virtue of how we view categorization (i.e. WP:CATSPECIFIC); but occassionally it needs to be more obvious in order to avoid editing conflicts based on misunderstanding of categorization guidelines.
  • The categories involved here have historically been abused as meta tags, generally for the same reasons that article leads get stuffed with value labels and are over-cited: people are passionate about their POV. Every time you make a change on these categories, you need to be prepared to defend it. I have been working on cleaning this up for quite a while now and I will say that push-back on categorization is not terribly frequent, but when there is push-back, it is passionate. In those instances, defend it, but don't be (1) unbending and (2) hamstrung. Sometimes there is a good compromise, and other times, it's best to put a pin in it for later and move on, especially if it becomes heated.
  • If it becomes necessary, open a discussion on the category in question. I would avoid WP:CFD as that is generally for deleting, splitting, or merging.
ButlerBlog (talk) 14:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022-12 sources

[edit]

Thank you for the Martin Gilbert interview. For you:

Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 09:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Thismess (talk) 14:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2023-01 AHA Foundation

[edit]

Hello, I found in https://theahafoundation.org/pdf/AHA%202010%20Freedom%20of%20Expression%20and%20the%20Rights%20of%20Women.pdf#page=21 a complain that Mark Steyn, Ezra Levant, Brigitte Bardot, Geert Wilders, have been prosecuted for racist claims. Is the AHA Foundation part of the Counterjihad movement? Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 16:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For an organisation I think you would have to have a direct source essentially saying that the organisation is part of the counter-jihad movement. I did a search and could not find any source saying this about the AHA Foundation. So even though the organisation may have some favourable relations with counter-jihadists I don't think that is enough for making such an assertion of being part of the movement. Thismess (talk) 10:58, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. In The force of reason, chapter 3, Oriana Fallaci write that «Brigitte Bardot had been convinced for writing... That even in the remostest villages French churches have been replaced by mosques». Searching a source for that, the best that i can find in english-language and french-language is «les clochers de nos villages abandonnés sont remplacés par des mosquées». Do you have any clue? Did Oriana Fallaci mistranslate? Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about that, sorry. Thismess (talk) 21:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Islamism/Islamic terrorism

[edit]

Hi @Thismess, you recently edited the pages of a few Muslim terrorists, such as Yusuf Nazzal, removing categories like Islamist terrorist and Islamic terrorism. It seems clear that these individuals perpetrated acts of terrorism in the name of Islam, and yet you would deny this. Can you please explain? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:38, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Black September is a Palestinian nationalist terror group, it has never been regarded as Islamist. Nowhere is it said that these terrorists are Islamist either, so you need to revert your wrongful edits. Thismess (talk) 09:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Olympic Airways Flight 255 hijacking is a very good article. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 02:35, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Thismess! Your additions to John Guandolo have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 00:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Am I allowed to re-add the information if I paraphrase it better and/or use quotation marks? Thismess (talk) 10:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The content needs to be completely re-written in your own words. Quotations are not a good option, as quotes are only allowed when there's no alternative. In this case the freely licensed alternative is prose that we write ourselves. — Diannaa (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ann Corcoran (activist)

[edit]

On 23 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ann Corcoran (activist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ann Corcoran has claimed that refugees are a Muslim plot to colonize the United States? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ann Corcoran (activist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ann Corcoran (activist)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 12:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hook update
Your hook reached 7,602 views (633.5 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of August 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages

[edit]

Thank you for your recent articles, including Harastølen, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You can also use a friendly script for that. You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. For example, WikiProject Poland relies on such templates to generate listings such as Article Alerts, Popular Pages, Quality and Importance Matrix and the Cleanup Listing. Thanks to them, WikiProject members are more easily able to defend your work from deletion, or simply help try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information about using those talk page templates. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll do it from now, I was just never exactly sure of what the policy was on WikiProjects, when to add or rate or such. Thismess (talk) 05:15, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good template to know

[edit]

Template:Interlanguage link . See diff. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:12, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, was thinking about that. I think I'll actually try to write the article. Thismess (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Harastølen

[edit]

On 14 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harastølen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the former Lyster Sanatorium, which was used as the setting for the horror movie Villmark Asylum, is being renovated as a hotel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harastølen. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Harastølen), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Thismess. Thank you for your work on Imran Firasat. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello! I trust you're enjoying a wonderful day. I wanted to express my gratitude for your valuable contribution to Wikipedia through your article. I'm pleased to let you know that your article fully complies with Wikipedia's guidelines, so I've officially marked it as reviewed. Wishing you and your loved ones a fantastic day ahead!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:42, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Laurie Cardoza-Moore for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Laurie Cardoza-Moore is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laurie Cardoza-Moore until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

FatCat96 (talk) 03:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Birthdates and IMDb

[edit]

I just undid your addition of a birthdate to Robert B. Spencer (and messed up the edit comment, which is why I'm posting you here.) You had sourced the date to IMDb, and per WP:IMDB, we do not consider that a reliable source. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why Eric Harris is a neo-nazi

[edit]

There's a reason why he had the "Category: American neo-Nazis" (previously "Category:American white supremacists") on his page before that got removed: Robert Evans's The War on Everyone, an audiobook series on par with Kathleen Belew's Bring the War Home in terms of documenting the American far-right, talks about the Columbine shooting and brings up Eric's dedication to white supremacist and neo-Nazi ideology in his journal writings. It's for the same reasons why Jeff Weise (another school shooter) is a neo-Nazi: they book espoused neo-Nazi ideology. While neo-nazism/white supremacy wasn't a direct motive behind the attack, it doesn't change the fact that Harris expressed neo-Nazi beliefs. Razzamatazz Buckshank (talk) 21:57, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not me you have to convince that he was a neo-Nazi, the problem is that it is not established in the article about Harris that he was a neo-Nazi. If you can find reliable sources that Harris was a neo-Nazi then feel free to add the content to the article, but as it stands now it is not established in the article that he was a neo-Nazi. Thismess (talk) 22:13, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crossposting

[edit]

I am linking this discussion about DYK nom this user made for the awareness of future readers. I'm not fully comfortable with this user's edits, and think others should be aware too.

Template:Did you know nominations/Sam Solomon toobigtokale (talk) 10:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Thismess. Thank you for your work on Ryan Mauro. User:ARandomName123, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for your work on this article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|ARandomName123}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 17:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Please be aware that "articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles" (WP:CT/BLP) is also a contentious topic. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 01:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Thismess. Thank you for your work on Paul E. Sperry. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:12, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Thismess. Thank you for your work on 1977 Petah Tikva bombing. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:24, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article about David Wood

[edit]

You completely removed the Critisism section I added. Not all of them were blogs. 182.183.20.126 (talk) 07:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So why did you re-add the content with almost all blogs and unreliable sources then? Thismess (talk) 09:35, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Considering his content caused problems on youtube, isn't it fair to call him controversial in the least. For example in the lede section: "David Wood (born April 7, 1976) is an American evangelical apologist, social critic, and YouTube personality, who is the head of the controversial Acts 17 Apologetics ministry." 182.183.20.126 (talk) 11:52, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You need to describe why he is controversial, with good reliable sources, not just that he is controversial without any explanation. Also I haven't actually seen the specific use of the word "controversial" in any lead on a biography on Wikipedia, even on highly controversial people. Probably because the word itself is pretty meaningless from an encyclopedic standpoint. Thismess (talk) 12:32, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to and removals of Template:Islamophobia

[edit]

Hi Thismess, I noticed that you recently deleted all links to media organizations in Template:Islamophobia and subsequently removed the template from three articles about websites that are listed on the template: Document.no, FrontPage Magazine, and Jihad Watch. I've started a discussion about these changes at Template talk:Islamophobia § Removal of media organizations. Please feel free to participate if you are interested. — Newslinger talk 07:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Freedom, Equality and the Muslim Brotherhood

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Freedom, Equality and the Muslim Brotherhood at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 4meter4 (talk) 08:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Rasmus Paludan

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Rasmus Paludan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! GRuban (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Thismess. Thank you for your work on Danish Free Press Society. Rusalkii, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work, thank you. However the article seems to be missing or emphasizing that this organization tends to be seen as right-wing/emphasizing specifically freedom to criticize Islam, which all of the sources mention.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Rusalkii}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Rusalkii (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Thismess. Thank you for your work on Edwin Wagensveld. User:Ingratis, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for this interesting article, which I have reviewed.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ingratis}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Ingratis (talk) 00:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Freedom, Equality and the Muslim Brotherhood

[edit]

On 10 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Freedom, Equality and the Muslim Brotherhood, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 2010 documentary claimed to expose how the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrates Western society from within? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Freedom, Equality and the Muslim Brotherhood. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Freedom, Equality and the Muslim Brotherhood), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 00:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rasmus Paludan

[edit]

On 11 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rasmus Paludan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Rasmus Paludan caused a global controversy by burning the Quran? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rasmus Paludan. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rasmus Paludan), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hook update
Your hook reached 8,408 views (700.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of April 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Norske jenter omskjæres

[edit]

On 11 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Norske jenter omskjæres, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 2000 documentary exposed the secret support of female genital mutilation by Norwegian imams? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Norske jenter omskjæres. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Norske jenter omskjæres), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of templates from articles

[edit]

Don't do anything like Special:Diff/1219716592 again or you will find yourself the subject of a noticeboard filling. You have had other editors warn you about this previously and I won't continue to look past this behaviour. TarnishedPathtalk 13:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought articles had to be mentioned in a sidebar for the sidebar to be included in an article. I see that you have now added Yemini to the template subsequently, which I guess is fine by me if you think he is notable/relevant enough for inclusion. I have no intentions of being intentionally disruptive, I'm sorry if I made a bad call with this edit. Best regards. Thismess (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thismess, the issue here is that if the template didn't include him and that was the issue then you could have easily determined from the article on him that there was more than enough reliable sources to warrant his inclusion in the template. I don't want to harp on too much but I've noticed on a number of occasions that you've removed templates or categories when it has taken minimal work to justify the re-inclusion. You could have simply done whatever it took so that the category or template didn't need to be remove and then there would have been less edits performed overall? Anyway, happy editing. TarnishedPathtalk 06:24, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Thismess. Thank you for your work on Sovereignty, Identity and Freedoms. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zuhdi Jasser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MD.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brittany Sellner

[edit]

Hi Thismess, nice work on the Brittany Sellner article. Quick note, when creating new biographies make sure to include the {{authority control}} template just above the categories. This will pull links to various library databases from Wikidata if the subject has any published material. Thanks – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll keep that in mind. Thismess (talk) 23:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your Smear Article on A Private Citizen

[edit]

Your article on a private citizen Amy Mek is dependent on an outrageously biased 2018 HuffPo piece by democrat operative Luke O'Brien that doxed her and her family. This goes against Wikipedia's own standards: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons This is not an informational page about a notable person, it is a smear piece against a perceived political ally. The page should be removed or made neutral immediately. You are literally putting her and her family in danger. 216.73.160.151 (talk) 00:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand your concerns, but as a basic Wikipedia user I have no power to delete articles. While the information/sources the article is based on is readily available publicly, if you think you have a case for removing this article, you can contact Wikipedia directly through other venues, on the page you have linked to above for instance, with your concerns. Thismess (talk) 00:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you translated text from We do not want Islam in the Czech Republic to another page. While you are welcome to translate Wikipedia content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the contributor(s) of the original article. When translating from a foreign-language Wikipedia article, this is supplied at a minimum in an edit summary on the page where you add translated content, identifying it as a translation and linking it to the source page. For example: Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if translation is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{translated page}} template on the talk page of the destination article. If you have added translated content previously which was not attributed at the time it was added, please add attribution retrospectively for that also, even if it was a long time ago. You can read more about author attribution and the reasons for it at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Broc (talk) 14:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reminding me about this Thismess (talk) 16:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raphael Shore

[edit]

If you could please get back to me regarding what I asked on Raphael Shore's Talk page.

TIA

MaskedSinger (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Europenews.dk

[edit]

Hello, Thismess,

Thank you for creating Europenews.dk.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Europenews.dk&redirect=no#

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|1ctinus}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

-1ctinus📝🗨 16:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thismess&oldid=1244022348"