User talk:BooleanQuackery

Welcome!
Hello, BooleanQuackery, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Mathglot (talk) 08:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Hi BooleanQuackery! Thank you for your edits to Church of Scientology. It looks like you've copied or moved text from Xenu into that page, and while you are welcome to re-use the content, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. If you've copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 04:59, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't aware of this policy. BooleanQuackery (talk) 05:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Edit-warring on Spearman's hypothesis
Hi BooleanQuackery! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article 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, 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. NightHeron (talk) 12:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi NightHeron; I did not edit-war on Spearman's hypothesis, per WP:3RR. There is a discussion which you can find here. During a dispute, one should not revert from the status quo until consensus is established. Consider inserting a tag indicating the text is under discussion instead. BooleanQuackery (talk) 18:02, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You should read the page WP:3RR if you're going to link it: The three-revert rule is a convenient limit for occasions when an edit war is happening fairly quickly; it is not a definition of "edit warring", and it is absolutely possible to engage in edit warring without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so. --JBL (talk) 19:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 16:26, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

See Talk:Spearman's hypothesis, an article you’ve edited
You are interested in the topic and the alert applies to you. Doug Weller talk 18:24, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll be sure to follow Wikipedia's policies and the page-specific restrictions either way. I just mean to say that I'm less interested in the "race/ethnicity" aspects of Spearman's hypothesis, though I know the topic in general has been connected to race/ethnicity. Thanks for the message. BooleanQuackery (talk) 18:32, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I just read about why it's necessary to notify users. Makes sense now. BooleanQuackery (talk) 07:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Lack of socks
They always disappear when I put them in the wash BooleanQuackery (talk) 07:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the laugh! That may be the first laugh I ever got at this Potterville. With at least four different mopes (including the head-mope-in-charge) tag-teaming you, they are certainly taking you seriously. Always keep in mind what they live for, in no particular order: arresting the spread of knowledge, and wasting people's time. I only come here a few times a year, and always come to regret it.2603:7000:B23E:33EE:4840:EF0A:344F:50C0 (talk) 18:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)