User talk:Bobyoung53

Welcome!
welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Questions or place   on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Literature geek |  T@1k?  02:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

December 2018
Hello, I'm LakesideMiners. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Idiot— because it 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 Help Desk. Thanks.  LakesideMiners My Talk Page 13:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

May 2019
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 15:59, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Trump derangement syndrome. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Wikipelli Talk  16:07, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Why is a non-scientific faux syndrome like this allowed to exist in an "encyclopedia" All TDS is is a smear on people how don't like Donald Trump and this should not exist here and would not exist in a legitimate encyclopedia. I would like to know where I can take this complaint where it will get serious consideration, thank you. I have been a donating member for some time now and take serious exception to this garbage appearing in Wikipedia, I will appreciate your response. Bobyoung53 (talk) 18:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I imagine you would want to take it up with dispute resolution, but as there are reliable sources discussing the term, it is frankly unlikely that the article will be removed. Something to consider is that Wikipedia is built on reliable sources, and things can't be scrubbed simply because we don't like them (or find them to be garbage, or non-scientific, etc.). If you can find a Wikipedia policy that the article is violating, you could look into kicking off the deletion process on your own, but again, it's a fairly well-sourced and neutrally-written article (or at least as neutral as it can be with so contentious a subject), and most editors are likely to !vote "Keep". NekoKatsun (nyaa) 19:38, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I am a retired psychiatric Registered Nurse and have worked with many psychiatric Syndromes which is a cluster of REAL usually maladjustment personality symptoms and is put in the DSM-4. There is no such thing as TDS, it is a fake syndrome that is used to smear people who criticize right wing's hero, has-been Donald J Trump and it IS garbage and non-scientific, if this right wing dominance in Wikipedia persists it will lose a lot of the hard earned credibility it has gained since its inception over the years. Psychiatric illnesses and syndromes can be found in the DSM-4, there is no TDS in it and Wikipedia will continue to appear as a joke as long as it takes partisan sides in stuff like this. I have noticed a lot of right wing bias in political articles here lately such as the one on The Palmer Report, it is very easy to find partisan opinion to support just about anything you want nowadays and I suggest Wiki to be a little more careful about frivolous entries like "TDS" if it wants to be taken seriously, if there is a right wing bias here it should be dealt with posthaste, thank you. Incidentally I am NOT a partisan left winger, I am actually an independant who has voted both sides before. Bobyoung53 (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Incidentally I should have put in DSM-5 not 4, thank you. Bobyoung53 (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

New message from Wikipelli
Wikipelli Talk  20:39, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

{{unblock|reason=Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 192.168.1.5

New message from Wikipelli
Wikipelli Talk  10:32, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

I have been blocked for editing because of a 'web host block' although I suspect that is not the real reason but put this in yesterday: {{unblock|reason=Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 192.168.1.5 Please unblock me as it is hampering me from taking part in discussions, thank you. Bobyoung53 (talk) 14:07, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

New message from Wikipelli
<i style="color:#005751">Wikipelli</i> <sup style="color:#7b68ee">Talk </b> 18:44, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

June 2022
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jordan Peterson. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:40, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * So you allow antivaxxers to write their own pages, this guy is a whack job, you should check the entries a little more closely. Bobyoung53 (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  15:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)


 * OK thank you, it appears that you actually took out more than I put in and also appear to have taken out the thing I disagreed with which is why I put in my revision in the first place. Bobyoung53 (talk) 03:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)