User talk:98.204.49.185

October 2018
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Tim Wise has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. ''I notice that you used the edit summary "reverted to accurate into" when you actually did not revert the previous edit at all. It looks like you wanted to make it look like the previous vandalism had been reverted (possibly to discourage other people from reverting it) but to avoid actually reverting it. Now maybe this was all a big mistake, in which case please be much more careful in future, but if it was deliberate then it was dishonest. Furthermore, if you are working in collusion with the editor who made the previous vandalism then you could both be blocked for sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry.'' DanielRigal (talk) 19:45, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


 * You are way overthinking this. This reads like an insane conspiracy theory.  I reverted the summary a more accurate one from the history, that used to be the summary, hence the word reverted.  That's all I was trying to say. I'm contributing to the wikipedia.  Not anyone's puppet, or trying to mislead anyone. Furthermore don't issue any more threats against me or this IP. 98.204.49.185 (talk) 01:47, 2 November 2018 (UTC)


 * If you check the diff here you will see that this is not the case. All you did was add a blank line. Maybe you thought that you were reverting something but you weren't. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:51, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I didn't add a blank line, I corrected it back to read that he's "a Jewish anti-white racist activist and writer who has written about his plans for the extermination of white people." Not sure why that is showing as just a blank line on the link you provided. 98.204.49.185 (talk) 01:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC


 * Oh. So you were trying to add, not remove, the anti-Semitic drivel, or do I misunderstand you? Are you really admitting to that? --DanielRigal (talk) 02:07, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Correct, I'd have to disagree with your characterization of it as such though. I was trying to update the article to reflect accurate information on this man, what's disgusting is that this blatant racist is called an "anti-racist" in the first line of his current summary. It's like Orwellian newspeak. I happy to admit to trying to correct it.  I admit the edit might not have been the most encyclopedic thing, but it was a previous version that was more accurate than what was there. Maybe it should read something along the lines of "Wise claims to be an anti-racist but he has been characterized by others as an anti-white racist."  98.204.49.185 (talk) 02:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)


 * DanielRigal, I can tell you that there is no technical information that suggests these two are the same, though I share your doubts. And that was a pretty disgusting edit. Drmies (talk) 01:54, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Disgusting? Are you referring to my edit or the subject of the article? 98.204.49.185 (talk) 02:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)


 * He is referring to the anti-Semitic drivel about "the extermination of white people" which was added in the edit before yours. --DanielRigal (talk) 02:07, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No, that was the change I made. Also, it's not anti-semitic drivel.  This guy is actually an anti-white racist, and his advocation of white extermination was cited.  98.204.49.185 (talk) 02:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

OK. It is clear that you are confused. When you made the anti-Semitic edit you were logged in as User:Psychoticflora. I gave them a final warning for that edit and now I am giving you one:
 * That is not my username. I am not that user. 98.204.49.185 (talk) 02:26, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Both you and they tried to make exactly the same racist edit at the same time and they beat you to it? I don't think so. Anyway, it doesn't matter. You admit that you tried to make that edit so that's enough to put you on final warning irrespective of anything else. --DanielRigal (talk) 02:30, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not that user and you are paranoid. It isn't any cause for a warning in either case though. 98.204.49.185 (talk) 02:32, 2 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I have made a further edit which will hopefully leave everyone satisfied. Changed to "is a American activist and writer who discusses issues of race" 98.204.49.185 (talk) 02:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)