User talk:Morbidthoughts

April 2024

Hello, I'm TheDarkKnight433. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Abbas Ansari have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Why did you delete the whole source claiming the statement. Also, there is live discussion going in the talk page. Don't revert it without concensus. It's a vandalism of article. TheDarkKnight433 (talk) 03:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

The article is currently being discussed at BLPN.[1] Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Dispute on Talk:LiveJasmin#Latest_proposed_"Controversy"_section_improved_after_a_number_of_suggestions_from_the_community

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Alexfotios (talk) 21:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

T.H.

I'm getting to the point where I either need to step back from this Henyard nonsense or take it to AN/I. I will be ignoring the page unless there's something there that didn't come from SecretName101. Please tag me if anything develops that's actually worth engaging in. Simonm223 (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

In fact, scratch that, I'm just walking away from this one. Apologies. Simonm223 (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

No problem. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:19, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Article related to Abbas Ansari

I noticed that you recently reverted the entire article of Abbas Ansari. I wanted to inquire about the reason behind this action. The article was previously edited by a user named goodfacts, who is a known sock of someone and has been banned. The information in the article, including details about Abbas Ansari's involvement in multiple murder cases and the arrest of his wife, was sourced from reliable articles and is already included there. Furthermore, the structure of the article was concise and provided clear information. However, the recent edits made by the banned user resulted in fragmented sections and compromised the overall clarity of the article. Considering these factors, I believe it would be appropriate to revert to the previous version of the article for a more coherent presentation of the information. Thank you for your attention to this matter.Hii, I noticed that you recently reverted the entire article of Abbas Ansari. I wanted to inquire about the reason behind this action. 2402:8100:384C:2AA8:1505:7A5E:857D:D6D0 (talk) 20:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I believe you are the blocked user, User:TheDarkKnight433. Biographies of living people are to be written conservatively. The information about the murder is not directly supported in the citation given, because it seems to be referring to Mukhtar's murder cases. WP:BLPCRIME applies to accusations about his wife so the information is meant to be limited. Discussion and consensus must be reached at Talk:Abbas Ansari before reinstatement of any disputed edits. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

What about adding 'Indian gangster turned politician' or "Indian gangster and politician" in front of his dad's name? I can provide you with the source, and it's also written on Mukhtar Ansari's page that he was a gangster first. Additionally, about his wife, she was not accused but given jail by the court, so this has to be added. Also so many details about his great-grandfather were also added, isn't that supposed to be limited in the background, and why are the details of his father just so small? Also, there are too many short sections. It's already mentioned twice in the introduction that he is a politician from some constituency, so what's the need to add another representative column just to add this thing once again?

https://www.cnbctv18.com/india/politician-mukhtar-ansari-sentenced-to-years-in-jail-15430361.htm

https://www.etvbharat.com/english/state/uttar-pradesh/nikhat-ansari-released-on-bail/na20230819111610431431881 2402:8100:384E:3694:1505:7A5E:857D:D6D0 (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:PROXYING Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Editors in turn are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned or blocked editor (sometimes called proxy editing or proxying) unless they are able to show that the changes are productive and they have independent reasons for making such edits.

I'm giving you reliable sources and you didn't answer my question. 2402:8100:384E:3694:1505:7A5E:857D:D6D0 (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:CHOICE Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Maa chuda laude k baal. Now go to the Google translator and translate it mf. 106.79.237.248 (talk) 19:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Naw, too much work per WP:CHOICE. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Boxing rankings

Greetings. You've removed a few of these sections from boxers' articles on the premise that such rankings need secondary sources, yet on tennis players' articles (e.g., Novak Djokovic) they seem just fine to use an ATP ranking—a primary source—with no secondary sources. Out of curiosity, are WikiProject Tennis doing things wrong too? Likewise for snooker players (e.g., Ronnie O'Sullivan) they use a primary source from their tour. The rankings used in boxing are not even affiliated with the boxers themselves, so what would be inappropriate about them being used as primary sources? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFF. Sports articles are riddled with trivialities of what editors think is WP:ITSIMPORTANT. Why are those specific rankings included if they are not mentioned in relation to the boxer in secondary reliable sources? WP:WEIGHT is policy and inclusion can be seen as promoting and endorsing the rankers like whatever hell the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board is. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Also the equivalent argument to ATP rankings (who the men play for) would be the sanctioning body rankings. Boxing articles seem to address this by noting the boxer's title history. Those are also widely reported by RS. Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Granted, and that's why I mentioned other examples because I was interested to see a rationale. I've long considered the myriad rankings in active boxers' lead a bit of a mess, but they've been a mainstay for years so I hadn't given them much thought until now—in fact I'd completely forgotten that I once brought it up at WikiProject Boxing. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 01:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Regarding reinstatement of website link on page

Greetings to you. My intention for removing the website link on that person's page was that it directed users to a website that sold pornographic performances by that person instead of directing them to a website she maintains. I have no interest in championing censorship, but that link was an advertisement, not (necessarily) a relevant link. Perhaps my original statement could have been worded better, but that was my intention. 203.212.241.19 (talk) 05:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC)