User talk:TrotskyChilde

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, TrotskyChilde. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Revolutionary Communist International, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Your low edit count as well as non-neutral edits that promote the viewpoint of the RCI at the undue expense of others, while also suggesting without evidence media bias or duplicity, suggest you are here for a singular-purpose and have some connection to the organisation involved. Please desist from editing such pages. Rambling Rambler (talk) 14:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I simply added the RKP statement quoted in the ETC article? Rather than deleting I would suggest rewriting it then? TrotskyChilde (talk) 23:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about yourself?

Most of your edits are relating to the Trotskyist movement. All attempts in the RCI article to put forward their response regardless who it is sourced is quickly removed by yourself.

While I agree that my edit about the "are you a communist" campaign could've be written in another way and included other sources but rather than contribute to improving those sections you simply deleted them. TrotskyChilde (talk) 15:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rambling Rambler (talk) 07:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 14:11, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to bring an end to the editing war? That's why I posted in talk in order to consensus how to deal with ETC allegations?

I put forward two solutions but @Rambling Rambler simply dismissed them and and got me blocked. I didn't even get a chance to reply to him.

Based on the discussion on the Administrators' noticeboard there seems to be even agreement on how to deal with the allegations. TrotskyChilde (talk) 20:49, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rambling Rambler didn't get you blocked, your conduct did. Please feel free to file an unblock request if you believe it was in error. Star Mississippi 20:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

TrotskyChilde (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

False claims of not here to build encyclopedia

Decline reason:

Looking at this edit you seem to have a conflict of interest with respect to the article. If you are interested in making edits about other subjects, then tell us what they are in your next unblock request. PhilKnight (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I have never participate in the editing war about the ETC article but instead tried to accurately present the various claims made in the conflict.

Even @Black kite on Administrators' noticeboard put forward deleting the paragraph one of the option they put forward and other being accurately describing the dispute.

On the contrary I feel there have been attempts to silence the RKP's response regardless how it is sourced.

I did make a mistake in how I worded an edit about the RCI's are you communist campaign and some other sources could've been added. This was a rather minor error to be honest and could've easily been corrected by another editor.

TrotskyChilde (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"On the contrary I feel there have been attempts to silence the RKP's response regardless how it is sourced."

Both before and after your inappropriate edits the group's denial and further critical view from an independent source were already contained in the section, so clearly we're doing a crap job of "silencing" the RKP as you claim.

"Even Black kite on Administrators' noticeboard put forward deleting the paragraph one of the option they put forward and other being accurately describing the dispute."

The user your make reference to, while having a view on the content, also stated "obviously the blatantly promotional stuff needs to go, and yes there is obviously COI here" so pointing to their comments isn't the defence you think it is. Rambling Rambler (talk) 22:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, while wikipedia doesn't recognize a right to reply a reply from RKP is contained in original ETC. I think it is only fair that reply is highlighted if their own article cannot be added. TrotskyChilde (talk) 05:14, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]