User talk:205.175.106.238

Welcome!
Hello, 205.175.106.238, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place   on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Happy editing! OkayKenji (talk) 02:23, 17 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I especially appreciate the changes you made to the launch table in Starlink (satellite constellation), It has a lot more important details then it had before. I hope you stay and continue to contribute to Wikipedia (no pressure though)! OkayKenji (talk) 02:23, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Gab (social network). If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * Calling somebody disingenuous is a personal attack? Or are you referring to mentioning wp:cabals when somebody acts like it "The aims of such groups may be disruption of the project, promotion of its members to become Wikipedia functionaries, or canvassing and/or meatpuppetry and/or tag teaming, possibly to impress a specific point of view on the encyclopedia. While speculation exists about how much influence such groups have over the encyclopedia, social groups are a fact of life, and some users have been known to use off-wiki means (IRC, e-mail, external websites, etc.) to coordinate their actions on-wiki."  And all I did was leave a constructive comment within 24h of the discussion being started, including actual NPOV references. wrongthink shall not be tolerated on wikipedia /s. 205.175.106.238 (talk) 05:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No, politicizing Wikipedia and personal attacks will not be tolerated. I am not quite sure you know what Wikipedia is: it's not a place where you go to do some thinking--for that we have Facebook, Black Twitter, and bars. We're here to write articles. Drmies (talk) 05:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * My original comment was not about politicizing, as it was simply a suggestion along the lines of a MOS standards (which is definitely valuable when it comes to controversial topics). But that comment was hidden (instead of archived) in under 3 minutes by a "retired" editor even though other people added to the "closed" discussion after my comment was hidden from sight. 205.175.106.238 (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

I wasn't being disingenuous, from my vantage point, the NYT is, indeed, centrist. It is also probably the most highly esteemed mainstream English-language newspaper in the world. It is a pro-capitalist, anti-socialist entity which is not a left-wing, certainly, not "far left" organization. But it all depends on the original basis from which you start. That is, the four-fold spectrum of political economy typology, to me, goes accordingly: Left (Communists, Anarchists — Public property), Moderate Left (Social Democrats — Public property, some private property), Moderate Right (Reform Liberals — Private property, some public property), and Right (Classical Liberals — Private property). These are the ideal types that can exist in material reality. But if you start the typology well to the right of this, than anything Moderate Right becomes Left (which I call Centrist). El_C 05:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, if you put classical liberal at the edge of the right, no wonder you think a quote by NYT does not need to be explicitly attributed, and thus implied of being representative for the entire political spectrum. 205.175.106.238 (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Again, read below. That's the political economy typology — you can't go further to right, economically, than just private property and zero public property. These are just the limits material reality imposes in the form of a continuum. El_C 05:47, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Also note, that "far-right" entities like Fascists would actually be somewhere in the middle of the political economy typology. That's because there's the political economy typology, but there's also the typology which deals with political sympathy-antipathy. But all of this goes beyond the issue at hand, which is the reliability of such mainstream sources as the NYT and how that relates to Wikipedia policy. El_C 05:11, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * My initial comment simply aimed at reasoning why attributing a NYT quote to them specifically, instead of implying by omission that the "rating" is representative of everybody's point of view. 205.175.106.238 (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not. My above view is not represented in it. It is of a subset at particular space (country) and time (historically). El_C 05:47, 24 May 2019 (UTC)