User talk:67.180.143.89

On "chewing the citations"
You might notice me using the phrase "chewing the citations" in my edit summaries. Just as a zealous actor might "chew the scenery," or give an uncomfortably exaggerated performance of a scene, there is a tendency among Wikipedia editors to "chew" citations by elaborately attributing statements to their source, even when there is no particular reason to doubt their accuracy. Specifically: One should not constantly write "According to writer X in publication Y, 'verbatim statement here'[1]" where the truth of the statements is not in doubt. It is formulaic, casts implicit doubt on the text, and makes for tedious reading as one has to dig through noise to find the signal. If a reader wants to know who and where a claim came from, that's what the citation is for, and it is not hard to paraphrase.

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your constructive edits on Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Recent changes patrol

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in. If you like, you can  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (67.180.143.89) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&action=edit&section=new my talk page], or ask your question and then place  before the question on this page.

Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 04:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Direct quotation
Are you denying that this is a direct quotation from the source? This is your final warning. Stop edit warring and discuss on the article's talk page. Sundayclose (talk) 00:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I certainly am, considering that you changed the verb tense. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 00:10, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That is noted with brackets. It is a direct quotation. You may restore the quotation with the original tense, even though that is poor writing. I'm not pandering to this nonsense any more here. Take this to the article talk page. Otherwise your next stop will be at WP:ANI to explain your disruptive editing. Sundayclose (talk) 00:14, 30 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, it would be bad writing, which is why I just dropped the passage. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 00:19, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

October 2022
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Block, Inc.. Sundayclose (talk) 00:32, 30 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Removing maintenance templates that have been recklessly added is most certainly not vandalism. You have reverted the article four times, by the way. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 00:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Reverting vandalism is not a 3RR violation. But if you think I have edit warred by all means make a 3RR report. I suggest reading WP:BOOMERANG first. Don't remove maintainance templates again. Sundayclose (talk) 00:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)


 * A citation is not needed. I already added it. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 00:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

New message from Sundayclose
Sundayclose (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Damage Waiver
Where in the source does it say that a DW is in fact not insurance at all? TY — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 02:25, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * "the waiver is just that -- a waiver. It is not insurance." No licensed insurer issues it to the renter and it is not governed under the laws of insurance. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 02:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

List of Sovereign Defaults
Thw World Gold Council which you described as "a wingnut "sovereign citizen" outfit. Not reliable,"1 is anything but. It is widely regarded as one of the most authoritative organizations on both historical and current trends in the gold market. It is also apolitical with no connection to any major political parties or movements. And it certainly has no connection whatsoever with the fringe sovereign citizen nut jobs. When you borrow something, in this case gold, and expressly promise in writing to return what you borrowed, gold, and then fail to do so, that is a deafult. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * P.S. I think you may be confusing the WGC with GATA which is indeed a fringe conspiracy group. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


 * You cited a document hosted on Family Guardian. That is a wingnut sovereign citizen site and I will say it loud and proud to anyone. Whether WGC is an authority on "historical and current trends in the gold market." or, like so many other goldbug outfits, merely a marketing operation that poses as an authority, is of little relevance because the matter at issue is whether the 1933 devaluation was a debt crisis, not how the gold price behaved because of it. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 03:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Ack. You are correct about the hosting platform for the link. I just checked. I think they coopted it for their own fringy purposes. The WGC is a very respected organization that is often quoted in the mainstream press and media that cover financial matters. That said, the platform is disqualifying. If I can't find the original link, I will have to seek a better source. There are quite a few out there that cover the incident and clearly refer to it as a default. On which note, the controversy here is not about the devaluation of 1934. It is about the failure to repay people, who lent gold with the crystal-clear promise they would be repaid in gold. Two different issues. And the US Government understood the dangerous precedent they were taking because while they stiffed US bondholders, they were careful to scrupulously meet their obligations with foreign persons and entities holding our bonds. But for the moment I will put my objections on hold pending my finding the original web link. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

February 2023
Hello, I'm Wikipelli. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Fresno (miniseries), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Wikipelli Talk  23:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Special drawing rights. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Bar Harel (talk) 01:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I have not the slightest idea what you're getting at. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 01:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Schminnte. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 17:13, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

March 2023
Hello, I'm Clyde H. Mapping. I noticed that in this edit to List of largest U.S. bank failures, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Clyde H. Mapping (talk) 04:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk page protections
I've responded to your messages on my talk page. Thanks for drawing it to my attention. JBW (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hallo ser please help 2409:4088:811B:7FB6:9098:F2AB:782D:AD07 (talk) 10:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

June 2023
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Lower Cherokee. Please, read some Cherokee history. GenQuest  "scribble" 00:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi 67.180.143.89! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Lower Cherokee several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree&#32;at, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Jalen Folf  (talk)  21:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I asked GenQuest to state his reasons at his talk page. The only response I've received is the condescending threat above. Perhaps you should leave him a template as well. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Charles III requested move discussion
There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:38, 24 July 2023 (UTC)