User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q3 2020

Why are we suppressing information on a suspected Israels agent when it's backed by neutral and reliable sources
You mentioned on my page the following "Apart from the strange emphasis your edit places on the Mossad in a biography of a person who hasn't been asserted to have had anything to do with intelligence, the incorporation of rumors about her father is a further stretch. Given your history of edits concerning Israel, you are editing in an area that is subject to sanctions, in addition to the BLP discretionary sanction regime. Acroterion (talk) 20:52, 3 July 2020 (UTC)". I will give you benefit of the doubt and assume you haven't read the biography of Robert_Maxwell. So kindly please stop now and read it then continue. I knew you are not going to read it so here is a cut and paste from there to answer why I am saying he is a suspected Israeli agent on Ghislaine_Maxwell "The Foreign Office suspected that Maxwell was a secret agent of a foreign government, possibly a double agent or a triple agent, and "a thoroughly bad character and almost certainly financed by Russia." Maxwell had known links to the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), to the Soviet KGB, and to the Israeli intelligence service Mossad. Six serving and former heads of Israeli intelligence services attended Maxwell's funeral in Israel, while Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir eulogized him and stated: “He has done more for Israel than can today be said."

Shortly before Maxwell's death, a former employee of Israel's Military Intelligence Directorate, Ari Ben-Menashe, approached a number of news organisations in Britain and the US with the allegation that Maxwell and the Daily Mirror's foreign editor, Nicholas Davies, were both long-time agents for Mossad. "

When you have the assertion from a former mossad agent that he is one of them, then you have president and six head of Mossads attending his funeral why wouldn't you want to say "suspected Israeli agent"? Would you have done this if it was Putin and six KGB heads attending his funeral with a testimonial of a former KGB agent. Why not Israel then? It's reliable and neutral info that deserves to be published. MYS1979 (talk) 21:24, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * You weren't editing Robert Maxwell's biography, you were editing Ghislaine Maxwell's biography to insert speculation about her father. It's in inappropriate linkage, and a violation of BLP.  Acroterion   (talk)   22:20, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Not quite right Acroterion(talk). While I agree I wasn't editing her father's biography as the information that he is a suspected Israeli spy is already mentioned there and no need to edit anything this piece of information about Ghislaine_Maxwell father is pivotal to her biography. There are already large sections about her father there! Did you not notice that? Are you suggesting to delete them because it's her biography. How about we remove Epstein references from her biography while we are at it and see what's left! Why are you specifically interested in removing the info about her father's connection to Mossad. I presented this topic in a very neutral way with reliable sources, I didn't state he is one, I said "suspected agent" to be extra careful and neutral.

MYS1979 (talk) 22:31, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * You are abusing a secondary article as a coattrack for accusations against the father, and appear to be trying to imply guilt by association for the daughter. You've been warned before about your edits concerning Israel in general.There are enough conspiracy theories concerning Epstein, Maxwell and Maxwell, youn must provide direct referencing to show that this is relevant to the daughter.  Acroterion   (talk)   22:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)


 * So let me get this straight Acroterion(talk), someone who has been arrested on six counts related to child sex and trafficking who has a partner with at least one fake passport and was found dead/(killed according to his brother) in his jail who traveled to Israel regularly, and where both had video and pictures of their VIP guests in not optimal situations, and you think saying her father a "supected mossad agent" is coattrack? Let me tell you what coattrack, her father was a florist who enjoys tea and biscuits after dinner that would be coattrack.


 * Yes, and since you have made it plain that you are promoting an unsourced personal theory, you are warned for synthesis too.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:00, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
 * It seems we are chasing our tails here? let's agree to disagree on this one and let the readers decide for themselves if mentioning that someones father is a spy is relevant or not to their biography especially when both share a life of action, crime, arrests, dignitaries, and even possible murders.  I know where 99% of people out there stand on this one.
 * No, you are directly warned for inappropriate synthesis in a biography, as an administrator action. You will be blocked if you continue.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:39, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Carter Page
The statement is materially incorrect and needs to be modified. Similar errors have NOT been found in other FISA warrants. The reporting has been debunked and the citation is improper. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D33pState2020 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Use the talkpage to describe why you think it should be changed, and why you should prefer a generally deprecated source, the Washington Times, over a generally reliable source, the New York Times.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think this account is WP:NOTHERE. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The username and editing focus is certainly suggestive of that.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I blocked the account as NOTHERE. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:24, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

British Isles's population density
Hi, you undid my edit on British Isles changing the population density from 216 to 228 under the reason "not sourced", which I don't really understand since the reason of my edit is based on a simple calculus based on the informations which are already in the article.

Grab a calculator and see yourself: 71,891,524 inhabitants on 315,159 square kilometers gives 228 inhabitants per square kilometer, not 216. Whether or not the 71,891,524 number is correct, which I don't know since I don't really understand where the guy who added it found it in the source indicated, keeping the mathematical incoherence would be bizarre.

I did search for reliable sources for the British Isles population, and it's complicated. Adding up Ireland's and United Kingdom's UN estimates is bad since their UK estimates probably incorporate the British Overseas Territories which aren't part of the British Isles, and are generally too broad and less accurate than estimates of the national government. So I looked up the UK official mid-2019 estimate. Adding up England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, I get 66,796,807.

But the Crown dependencies (Isle of Man, Guernesey and Jersey, the last two being incorporated in the 315,159 total area number in the British Isles article) don't seem to be included in those data, and after quick search I can't find any reliable source for their population in 2019.

Moreover, the official Irish data closest to the UK ones are from April 2019, so adding them to the aforementioned UK mid-2019 estimate would be a somewhat inaccurate. And the Crown dependencies would be missing.

To sum up, I can't come up with a reliably sourced population number for the British Isles in 2019. Ergo the population density cannot either be reliably sourced since it's calculated based on this number. However, having nothing better, I'm not going to change the current potentially false & unsourced population number, and it's going to stay there for a while because virtually no one cares about those demographic trifles.

Should we not therefore rather have a potentially false & unsourced population number and a mathematically coherent 228 density number than a potentially false & unsourced population number and a mathematically incoherent 216 density number?

I think we should. But edit warring over this would be childish, so I won't insist. Your call. 90.8.221.223 (talk) 16:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Go find a source for your change, especially since you indicate that the subject is open to interpretation. It's that easy.  Acroterion   (talk)   17:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, as I said, I've searched and I don't have one, because as far as I know no official source gives an estimate for the British Isles's population or population density as a whole, and the official estimates from each components are not coordinated. So I can't come up with a correct sourced estimate. Maybe someone else will be able to in the future, I don't know. Maybe the currently displayed number 71,891,524 is correct, but the guy just didn't add his source. I just wanted it at least to be coherent mathematically with the density number regarding the total area. But I guess it will have to remain mathematically false until someone better or luckier than me at searching for sources does the job then. 90.8.221.223 (talk) 19:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll give it a try. The CIA Factbook is usually regarded as a reliable source of statistical information of that kind.  Acroterion   (talk)   19:50, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I haven't located on for the British Isles overall, and calculating from separate sets of statistics will run into the definitional issue you've encountered. I'll keep looking.  Acroterion   (talk)   20:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Stone Mountain
There is an editor, 96.252.95.115 editing at Stone Mountain who has been reverted three times and has reverted back three times. His edits carry subjects such as,  "Fixed this. Language was too vague. This is a white supremacist monument. I don’t want to read any of the bullshit “Southern pride .” Fuck that"    Could you pleae keep an eye on them. Thanks, Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 23:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Certainly, it's been endemic to some degree across the encyclopedia.
 * I lived for a couple of years within a couple of miles of Stone Mountain. It's a bizarre window into the Lost Cause movement at its most extravagant.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I do so enjoy editing without politics, and editing sculpture used to be so safe. Now I'm caught up with Gutzon Borglum (an article I started in on about 15 years ago) and now he is front page news and . . ......... and you know how that goes.  Thanks, Carptrash (talk) 00:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Reversions to my contribution
You reverted my edit to the Tube Bar prank calls page - why? I was correcting the faux names used on the calls, specifically "Phil my ass" and "Phil Lucio" etc. Instead of throwing around baseless accusations of disruptive editing with a copy-paste template, explain the issue you have with the edits or move along. 81.154.114.201 (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Use sources, and stop reverting to you preferred version at NONAZIs. Your behavior is borderline trolling.  Acroterion   (talk)   12:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Your definition of trolling is an odd one. And the Tube Bar article's existing sources already point out the names. 81.154.114.201 (talk) 12:48, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Your approach to other editors is an odd one. I've protected the article so you can explain what you're doing on the talkpage, as we expect, rather than deeclaring that you'll just keep reverting. Between your first edit to a noticeboard and a pronounced resemblance to BKFIP, I don't think you're a Wikipedia novice.  Acroterion   (talk)   12:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right, I'm no novice - but I'm not BKFIP. I just don't understand why I've got to jump through hoops to improve an article by correcting an erroneous name used in it? In the Tube Bar Tapes, they goad the bartender into saying "Phil Lucio" (fellatio) and "Phil Myacsz" (fill my ass)). Whoever curated it originally was incorrect.81.154.114.201 (talk) 13:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on being au courant on our names for long-term abuse cases. You do a good impression of BKFIP's attitude. And BKFIP's attitude is why his otherwise helpful edits tend to get thrown out with the obnoxious ones.  Acroterion   (talk)   13:15, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know who BKFIP is - I just made an assumption he was a user (presumably blocked?) that you were referring to. And my attitude stems from dealing with obstructive admins (to the point that one particular senior admin's presence is enough to aggravate) more interested in enforcing the letter of the law than the spirit and throwing sock accusations at every corner and randomly reverting edits on that basis regardless of the quality of contribution, so I decided I'd give the account angle a break and do things on my terms. 81.154.114.201 (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I've blocked Special:Contributions/82.132.184.86, who is almost certainly the same thing as OP. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:03, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXI, July 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

RE:
Hey there Acroterion,

Thanks or writing and for your opinion, I appreciate it a lot. Yes, you are right, Google does not craw wikipedia that easily. Since I did my reg to Wikipedia yesterday, I'm still getting used to the platform. It's not that user-friendly, but it's indeed important. I decided to write a page about myself in general to see how it works. It took me 2 hours :)) I would appreciate your input and help on some things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steffanvs (talk • contribs) 12:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm happy to restore it so you can scale it back and make it un-spammy. We tend to regard editors who start out talking about SEO with concern.  Acroterion   (talk)   12:39, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Britannia (TV series)
Hello, I saw that you engaged a user for potential edit warring on Britannia (TV series). The user started a talk discussion. Myself and several editors explained the problems with the content in question but the discussion appears to be deadlocked. I'm not really sure what the "next step" is but would appreciate any guidance you may have. Thanks,
 * It looks they've failed to gain policy-based consensus on the talkpage, so there is no further step other than "no." I attempted to explain to them the issues that they should address, and it looks like you got the same response, only at greater length.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello again. We seem to be back to the same issues including an edit warring IP (may or may not be the same user.) PAVA11 (talk) 18:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Greetings. There appears to be a brand new user piling on, added a NPOV tag, and whose user page seems to indicate a WP:NOTHERE concern. Not sure whether it's actually a new user. PAVA11 (talk) 04:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Irish Indentured servants - changes not cited
Okay, my apologies, I will ensure that I highlight my citations before publishing in future. I will cite these changes tonight and re-publish. Many thanks. StephenDedalus2020 (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You should discuss the sources and edits as proposals on the talkpage first.  Acroterion   (talk)   22:30, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay great, I'll spend some time putting a a proposal for a number of changes and communicate them to you here. I have saved the page to a word document and will get to it over the weekend. Thanks again.

18:39 17/07/2020 The five links I have listed below do not work. I have tested them on Internet Explorer and Chrome. In relation to the academia links, I have an academia account and user access is not the problem. I propose removing these links from the "External Links" section. Thank you. 1.	https://ibs.colorado.edu/alston/econ8534/SectionIII/Galenson,_The_Rise_and_Fall_of_Indentured_Servitude_in_the_Americas.pdf 2.	https://plymouth.rl.talis.com/items/50DBECD4-0395-BE9B-1689-460E944F3724.html 3.	http://www.theflightoftheearls.net/SlaveryReview.pdf 4.	https://www.academia.edu/24907710/Irish_Indentured_Servants_Papists_and_Colonists_in_Spanish_Colonial_Puerto_Rico_ca._1650-1800 5.	https://www.academia.edu/25013836/The_Irish_in_the_Anglo-Caribbean_servants_or_slaves


 * Go ahead and propose those changes on the talkpage. Keep in mind that dead links are not grounds for removal of references (they should be updated instead), but I agree that dead external links in the external link section should be removed.  Acroterion   (talk)   18:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay I will propose the edit. In relation to citation 27 the link no longer works -http://www.historyireland.com/volume-24/the-rish-in-the-anglo-caribbean-servants-or-slaves/

I have googled the article and found the appropriate link, I will go ahead and propose these edits too. - https://www.historyireland.com/18th-19th-century-history/18th-19th-century-social-perspectives/the-irish-in-the-anglo-caribbean-servants-or-slaves/

http://www.historyireland.com/volume-24/the-rish-in-the-anglo-caribbean-servants-or-slaves/

Animal Rights - Wikipedia
Euro - Centric characters are still in control of distorting history on Animal Rights.

What are the lessons Euro - Centric people have learnt from the Black Lives Matter movement?

The section on Animal Rights completely leaves out the major contribution by Humanist movements outside Europe.

it is a shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.209.251 (talk) 13:36, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The problem with your edits is that they're not sourced. Please provide sourcing, per policy.  Acroterion   (talk)   13:38, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

50.204.198.17
Perhaps you can revoke talk page privileges as well. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:75D4:48D4:757F:B45F (talk) 20:35, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Done, I see. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:75D4:48D4:757F:B45F (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reverts. I'll talk to Naleksuh about how better to deal with nastiness like that without reverts.  Acroterion   (talk)   20:37, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

false claims of attacking editors
Hello Acroterion, please stop attacking editors with whom you dont agree by making false accusations of attacking editors. If you cant deal with your bias then maybe its time to take a step outside and get some fresh air. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrindMocha (talk • contribs) 17:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

A request
Could you possibly chime in over here. It concerns overcategorization of election article. Another editor plus myself have been trying to inform this editor. You may want to read this too. Thanks....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:02, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail
JeffSpaceman (talk) 19:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

your assistance please...
You speedy deleted an article entitled Limbik, under WP:CSD.

I'd like to request userification, as I started an article on the firm's founder. If there is nothing worth cannibalizing I'll speedy the userified version.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 19:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * No problem, it's a Draft:Limbik.  Acroterion   (talk)   19:42, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for responding so quickly!
 * The article says the firm was founded by Zach Schwitzky and Josh Levin - and the sole contributor was , a clue the article's creation may not have been compliant with WP:COI. If a new article on this topic was to be started it would be best if it were a complete rewrite, and did not re-use any passages from the first version.
 * I am finished with my review. Thanks.
 * I will note one further minor point.  reverted five good faith edits Joshuaelevin made after it had been tagged for deletion.  I see this as unnecessary, and a lapse from WP:BITE.  When an article is up at AFD good faith contributors are encouraged to make edits to address the concerns raised by those who favor deletion, right up until an administrator closes the review.  I've never read anything to suggest good faith edits are not allowed after an article has been tagged for speedy deletion.  I said I would tag it for speedy deletion, when I didn't need it any more.  I'll do that  in a couple of days, as I'd like to give Reddogsix a chance to review their revision, and decide for themselves as to whether my BITE observation holds any merit.
 * Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 22:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops. Reddogsix had their competency challenged at WPANI, for too many bad speedy nominations, and announced their retirement, in 2018.  So I will tag it now.  Thanks again for your help.  Geo Swan (talk) 22:27, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:07, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Frank Collin block evader
He emailed me from his account complaining about my reversion - with his phone number. Nice of him to make the block evasion so clear. Doug Weller talk 07:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Obligatory Blues Brothers reference.  Acroterion   (talk)   12:37, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

The Alapaha blue blood bulldog
You have a completely wrong history description and overview of this breed. It is a recognized breed by several registry. Including the American Rare Breed Association. I also run a registry and I am a breed historian. Can we actively fix your entry if I have documents from the original registry the Animal Research Foundation and the breed founder Lana Lou Lane. Superior alapaha kennels (talk) 23:46, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I have legit documents you have the entire article wrong Superior alapaha kennels (talk) 23:49, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I haven't edited the article at all, but you are welcome to correct the article, using published sources as references.Personal knowledge isn't admissible, because it must be capable of independent verification. In any case, you may not replace sourced information with different information without replacing the reference, and ideally you should have done that after mentioning your proposed edits and sources on the article talkpage so other editors can see the proposed changes. Additionally, you must respect the best practices in WP:COI and avoid self-sourcing and self-promotion. Small-population animal breeds tend to be poorly documented, but that isn't an occasion to add material that can't be found in published sources.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:56, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not self sourcing how do I get the proper information to you Superior alapaha kennels (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has completely false information regarding every aspect of the breed Superior alapaha kennels (talk) 00:05, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't know where the talk page is or who to submit the documents to for sourcing Superior alapaha kennels (talk) 00:07, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Are you contesting the source that is cited? Every article has a talkpage - there's a "talk" tab next to the article's tab at the upper left of the window. The talkpage is where you can propose edits and sources. It's just like college, everything must be referenced.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


 * As a matter of observation, general references tend to be spotty in their research on small-population breeds, so it's not surprising. However, you will still need published sources, which means that Ms. Lane needs to be mentioned in a book or reliable web publication that can be verified. Reliable means that the source has a reputation for fact-checking - breed fancy websites are often unreliable or represent narrow factions within a set of breed enthusiasts.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, i thought it is bad
I am sorry for doing wrong thing on this article Greta Thunberg. I thought that redlinks are bad, but it is not bad. I will not do this again soon. Rdp060707 (talk) 11:56, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Reason for reversion of improvements to the tables of the COVID-19 vaccine article
Hello,

You reverted some of my edits without providing an explanation. May I ask what was the problem? The reversion discarded proper sorting of the Phase of trial column by the number of participants, and it also restored the Notes column which does not contain tabular data and is more suitable for a group of footnotes. --Fernando Trebien (talk) 00:28, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like I misclicked.Sorry about that.  Acroterion   (talk)   01:31, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Red Phoenix
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Euryalus • SQL
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg GB fan
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news
 * There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
 * Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
 * Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
 * There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Your message (2nd August 2020)
You just left me a message. Accidentally I resaved my edit thinking it hadn't gone through.

But you're wrong to say it was "disruptive editing". It was just removing the contradiction of saying national socialists were far-right, but retaining the description of far right as a modern label for fascism. Surely that was needed to avoid "cognitive dissonance"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiKeith (talk • contribs) 23:53, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * National socialism is far right according to the consensus of political science since the 1930s. Naive editors keep disruptively claiming that Nazis were left wing because "National Socialist." The cognitive dissonance was a feature, not a bug, so it's not up to you to rectify it. The "socialism" part of national socialism is about as descriptive as the "democratic" in the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:58, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * WikiKeith, you said "the Nazis were fascists", and that's deceptive. Nazism falls under the broader heading of fascism, but it's more than that, and fascism is a far-right way of thinking, and so is Nazism, by way of deduction. If one disagrees with that, one either doesn't know what "far-right" (or "right-wing") means, or one is just repeating weird talking points derived from almost-far-right thinkers who are trying to sweep their stoop, as the Dutch might say. There might be one other option: one doesn't know what Nazism or fascism is, in which case one certainly shouldn't be editing that article. Drmies (talk) 00:04, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

I won't re-edit the page but it disappoints me that Wikipedia has become a political playground when I'm trying to make it neutral and accurate. There are plenty of historical scholars who discuss fascism also as a left-wing methodology. Eg Hugh Seton-Watson, Fascism, Right and Left", Journal of Contemporary History, 1966, Vol 1, 183-197. Or Coupland P.M. (2005) ‘Left-Wing Fascism’ in Theory and Practice. In: Copsey N., Renton D. (eds) British Fascism, the Labour Movement and the State. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522763_6

It's effectively Orwellian to now edit the present to pretend that, in the past, fascism was solely a far-right methodology. You should read 1984 and reflect.


 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It's not a forum for historical; revisionism. And in point of fact, there is an article on left-wing fascism - it has been applied to aspects of the German Democratic Republic and Peronism, but it is a niche concept. The NAtional Socialist party is consistently described as a right-wing party - they adopted the "socialist" tag as our article puts it "out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of socialism, as an alternative to both Marxist international socialism and free-market capitalism."  The Nazis were the original Orwellian speakers of Doublespeak.   Acroterion   (talk)   00:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

offensive material
Hi, you reverted and hided this once, but it was restored so if you could hide this too --Zache (talk) 07:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Notice of ANI that mentions you in passing
Greetings, FYI I filed a request at WP:ANI titled "CIR-based community-imposed site ban re: RTG". In providing a basis for my request I mentioned you and your prior dealings with this editor. Your input at ANI is optional, i.e., invited but not specifically requested. Thanks for reading. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Britannia (TV series) controversy
First, thank you for dealing with the controversy. Second, as you may have noticed, it has been disposed of. The two editors who were arguing in favor of the plagiarism claim were blocked for sockpuppetry. You had warned the first of them that they were close to a site block on English Wikipedia for conduct. Right after that, they got the site block for a different conduct issue. It is disposed of unless any more sockpuppets cause trouble, and, if so, sockpuppets usually get blocked quickly enough. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll, keep an eye on them. I expect they'll appeal at great length, and they've been using Commons as a dump for intelligence on editors who they disagree with. Thank you for your patient work at DR - I think by the fourth statement you'd exhausted all possible ways of getting them to produce a usable source.  Acroterion   (talk)   01:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, by the fourth statement I had gotten them to coloring inside the lines, but I was also asking to have their crayons taken away. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Is there a procedure for blocking or banning users on Commons, since you are saying that SR has been abusing Commons? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. I also thought it was worth noting the potential finding noted here (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/971156806). Not sure anything else needs done, just thought it was worth noting we all appeared to be missing the true extent of the user's interest in the subject, but it makes a lot of sense. Maybe worth noting is response to any potential appeal. PAVA11 (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * When I encounter such a single-minded account, blind to all but the cause they're promoting, I generally assume it's the person at the center of the issue or someone very close to them.  Acroterion   (talk)   03:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * True, but I'd expect them to hide it a little better if they aren't going to own it. Oops. PAVA11 (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Obsessive focus on one's own priorities and no others isn't necessarily compatible with message discipline.  Acroterion   (talk)   19:44, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Dean and Jean
Could you please move this entry deleted in 2009 to draftspace so I can see what was there? Thank you.Have a happy every day. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Draft:Dean and Jean is in place, not much to see.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXII, August 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

The Game Arcade, a.k.a. TheGameArcade
hi, you've just sent me a message regarding editing an article. it is not my intention at all to be blocked obviously. i just need to add some links to the article and it's done. do you think i can do this or better not? it's not my intention to go against wikipedia's rules or have any kind of problems (obviously). i'm new, joined a couple of hours at all and not yet familiarized with all the rules. best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBuzzr772 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

edits
i've just checked the article's page and noticed you deleted all the content. i know i created another similar page but my intention was not to spam. as i mentioned before i'm new here and wasn't sure if that page was an article or my user's profile. i have put my text back on the article that wasn't deleted. please do not make changes to it again. i won't be editing it anymore. if there's anything else feel free to contact me. best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBuzzr772 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Blocked for spamming after a clear warning.  Acroterion   (talk)   13:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

The deletion of Open2ANM
I am new at this wikipedia writing and if I mess up please forgive me. I am trying my hardest to write and publish this page on Alexander NeverMind. I have watched so many videos trying to understand wikipedia and all it entails. I believe now I may have a pretty good understanding of what is required and would like the opportunity to improve my page. So, I am asking if you would remove the delete from my page so I can work on it and bring it upto wikipedia's standards? Thank you --Open2ANM 15:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The tone of the deleted content was promotional. Replied at your talkpage.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Talk page access revocation
Hey Acroterion, would it be possible to revoke TPA for ? Thanks in advance. --   LuK3      (Talk)   23:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was out brushing the dogs. Explicit got it.  Acroterion   (talk)  

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Eddie891
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg SQL

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
 * A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
 * A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration
 * A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
 * An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
I appreciate your fast response both at Culture Abuse and my talk page. --   LuK3      (Talk)   16:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You're welcome - two grossly abusive features in one username merit everything we can do.  Acroterion   (talk)   17:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Skateboard Brands List
Hello, I recently visited [|skateboarding brands], and was planning to add and update the list to be more comprehensive and represent more accurately the prominent brands of the day. The first brand I was prepared to add was Deathwish. Apparently in 2010 you removed Deathwish Skateboards from the list, and the editor's note suggested that I ask you about adding the brand back in to the list. In this process I found a much more comprehensive list of companies so my edits aren't needed at this point. But I must admit, I am wondering why you would remove a prominent brand like Deathwish from the list, and wondering if I've missed something in the process of editing here that you might be able to educate me about. Thanks, I'll look for your response here as requested. --Skatepunk22 23.54:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That was a decade ago! I assume somebody was spamming the name without any indication of notability. Can you provide the diff from ten years back?  Acroterion   (talk)   11:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what "the diff" is, I'm sorry. Well, since it was that long ago and doesn't really matter at this point, I'll leave it alone. I'm trying to learn about all this stuff but there's a lot to learn and absorb that's a bit tough without doing it all the time. Thanks for your response. --Skatepunk22 (talk) 06:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I mean a link to the edit from ten years ago, and to whatever this other editor did/said. If they're notable now, just go and fix it with a reference to support it.  Acroterion   (talk)   11:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

More of same at Bobby Fischer
After expiration of your block on. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

St. Peter HS page
Acroterion, thank you for your constructive suggestion and your positive tone. We appreciate it very much, and will make sure to cite sources, whenever we can, for any contributions we make.

184.148.28.151 (talk) 10:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)A group of Teachers

Your use of revdel
Hi Acroterion! Happy labor day! I hope you're doing well and that you're having a great holiday! So, I noticed that you redacted the revision text and the edit summaries to two revisions on User talk:Sro23 (see here). I'm not sure why you redacted the content to either of these revisions, and only one of the two revisions needed their edit summary redacted (for obvious reasons lol). We're only supposed to remove items that meet the policy for it's proper use, and nothing more. Out of the four things you removed here (revision text to two revisions, and the edit summary of two revisions), only one of them needed it. I've restored visibility to the other items for you. If I missed something and if those revisions actually need to be revdel'd, please let me know as soon as possible and I will fix it. You're a great administrator, it's always a pleasure to see you here, and I'm always happy to work alongside you. :-) Have a great labor day!  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I did it to short-circuit the cycle of the vandal getting a new IP and simply reverting. I'm fine with you restoring it - I agree that in and of itself it's not a revdel thing, it's more just throwing a stick in the LTA's spokes.  Acroterion   (talk)   20:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Yeah, we just want to make sure that we revdel only what needs to go, and cut the grass no further than that. Revdel is extremely important in keeping the place sane, but its overuse also can hurt. Editors don't have access to that information, and what could otherwise have been scrutinized and used as evidence in a discussion. That's why I patrol the rev del logs and make sure that we're doing the right things. Anyways, no big deal, but I did want to let you know (mostly in case I missed something or if you objected to the changes I made)... Have a great labor day! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Copyright revdel request
''copyvio-revdel template commented out to remove this page from of Category:Requested RD1 redactions. Nthep (talk) 16:44, 8 September 2020 (UTC)'' Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 01:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks for the note.  Acroterion   (talk)   02:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll be more careful next time wrt to copyright issues as I wasn't aware of this policy. Flaughtin (talk) 03:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue Issue CLXXIII, September 2020
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Done as non-contentious housekeeping. Since it has a short history I might do an old-fashioned delete/restore when I remember how we used to do them and I've had something to eat, which will make me smarter.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:28, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Why Was My Page Deleted?
Hello,

I am Movement-specialist and I saw that you deleted my page for Stick Mobility due to "disruptive editing". I would like clarification as to why you thought my page should be deleted. There is no promotional content, nor is there any poor editing errors and I believe that it should be re-published.

Thank you in advance for the clarification.


 * I deleted it as spam, and I see that your account has been blocked by another user as a violation of WIkipedia's terms of use.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

User Page Deleted
Hello, My name is Isaiah Leonard. I am messaging you in regards to the deletion of the page I recently created. I understand that this site is an encyclopedia. I have references from other sources about my music. I was wondering what exactly I can do in the future so that my page might not get deleted. I am not using this as a host page, I simply would like to get my information out and available to the rest of the world. If I could get some details about what I can do to make my page more suitable, please let me know. Thank you for your time in advance. I hope we will be able to sort this out. Best, Isaiah Leonard

Personal attacks?
What personal attacks? You threaten me and accuse me of personal attacks and don't even cite what you are accusing me of doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caseyph (talk • contribs)
 * You already know this, but Expect to be blocked if you do anything like that again.   Acroterion   (talk)   03:14, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Sorry for the edit conflict at User talk:Sohcb8. I did not see your message before changing the block or posting my comment. We can try it your way if you like. – bradv  🍁  15:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No, I was on the edge of what you did myself, I was going to give them a little more rope, but I see no realistic hope that the editor will redeem themself. The recent blatantly misogynistic IP bears watching as well.  Acroterion   (talk)   15:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions
Hi Acroterion,

Did I break the rules or something? You put a Discretionary Sanctions warning on my talk page. If I did break the rules, my apologies. I just started editing.Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 01:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Ajpolino • LuK3
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Jackmcbarn
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
 * Pictogram voting rename.png →

Guideline and policy news
 * A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely 1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created.

Technical news
 * The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (T261630).

Arbitration
 * The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
 * Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.

Miscellaneous
 * The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
 * Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)