User talk:Darouet/Archive 4

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics). Legobot (talk) 04:23, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Malta convoys
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Malta convoys. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Metric
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Metric. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Please comment on Talk:BMW
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:BMW. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Charles, Prince of Wales
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Charles, Prince of Wales. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dorothy Tarrant
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dorothy Tarrant. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
I very much appreciate your kind words and attempt to set the record straight. It's amazing how diffs that show the actual comments make a big difference. I can't remember a time in my entire WP career that I ever cast aspersions, made PAs, or was hurtful toward anyone - my comments are typically a defensive response to what someone said to/about me, or misbehavior/condescension toward me. Making an editor aware that they're being disruptive is not casting aspersion. In fact, the exaggerated claims of misconduct that have been made against me is the definition of casting aspersions. Anyway, I don't want anybody to get in trouble - to be blocked or tb or the like - I took the issue to NPOV/N and we'll see what happens. Atsme 📞📧 02:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi thanks for your note. I haven't reviewed those talk pages thoroughly — just recent posts to see what some of the disagreements are about. I suspect that you and I would not agree about Donald Trump's political views. And in a way, when I read Racial views of Donald Trump, my sympathy aligns with plenty of the critiques written into the article. However, I strongly believe that all editors should take Raul's razor very seriously: an article is neutral if, when you read it, you cannot tell where the sympathies of the authors lie. I think the article is not neutral because it doesn't make an effort to achieve balance, and for that reason, I wish your editorial concerns would be addressed seriously. There's more I'd write on that topic but I'll leave it there.


 * Frankly, I don't know how editors like you have the patience to slog through so much stupidity and abuse (I don't point the finger at anyone in particular with this comment — even some editors with whom we've both disagreed recently have to do the same). But I hope you'll stick with the project: for many years now, I've appreciated your many content contributions, and your level-headed and civil comments on talk pages. Cheers, -Darouet (talk) 03:47, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lists of earthquakes
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Lists of earthquakes. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Shooting of Stephon Clark
In Shooting of Stephon Clark and other articles, we need to put a nation, as there are thousands of cities in the world, but only dozens of nations in the world. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:31, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree with you in principle; I suppose my only objection is the fear that the insertion of many locations (Meadowview, Sacramento, California, United States) interferes with the prose. If you can find a way to make it feel seamless I'd appreciate that. Note that I left your addition "United States" in the infobox at the top right of the article. -Darouet (talk) 13:39, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * hi, thanks for your contribution to WP. your edit removed his pimping conviction for being unsourced. in the future please use an inline citation for unsourced material and when possible add the citation yourself. example: search Stephon Clark and pimping, top result: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-stephon-clark-profile-20180328-story.html. Remember, citations are not required for every passage, searching for citation before deleting material is.  Darkstar1st (talk) 11:28, 30 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Hey my apologies, and I've added back the information, and a little more (he pled no contest), per the source I placed on the talk page, and that you linked above:.


 * I had removed the information because it didn't appear in either of the two inline citations provided at the end of the sentence describing his convictions. If the information were untrue it would be highly inflammatory and this is the kind of article where every sentence really does need inline citations, especially while the article is receiving a lot of traffic. But I regret that I didn't have time yesterday, after removing the information, to restore it per the LA Times source. Thanks for your help. -Darouet (talk) 14:21, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Osmosis RfC
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Osmosis RfC. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Immigration and crime in Germany
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Immigration and crime in Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Renaming 'Thoothukudi massacre'
I assume that you are not that familiar with the style of politics here in Tamil Nadu, India. Here, the term 'Massacre' is negatively sentimental for the mass public a thousand time than the term 'riot'. The term 'massacre' is used far less frequently; but the term riot is quiet frequent for a general public. Additionally, the term messacre is stongly remembered with the British period incident "Jallianwala Bagh massacre". The riots ordered against the agenda-driven mob which spear-heads a considerable number of illiterate mass-mobilized public to attack and vandalize the local collectrate is portrayed as a people's protest and wanted by some people to be tagged as a 'massacre', which could be later used by them as a propoganda tool. So I REQUEST, please go through the consecutive events objectively and do the need full for renaming the article. Thanks, -   Vaikunda Raja    :talk:   08:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi I don't agree with your proposed name change. You're correct at least that the term "massacre" has negative connotations. The OED describes a massacre as "The indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people or (less commonly) animals; carnage, butchery, slaughter in numbers; an instance of this." There are plenty of instances of massacres committed by soldiers, police, or their hires against unruly crowds, armed or otherwise: the Massacre of Tranent, Peterloo Massacre, and Everett massacre are good examples, though the list is long. In all those cases, the crowds who were massacred could easily have been described as "illiterate," agenda-driven mobs,"  "portrayed as a people's protest," etc., to use your own phrases describing those who were gunned down in southern India/ -Darouet (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Steve Down
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Steve Down. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Favonian
Darouet is a friend of Favonian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.104.19.36 (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Antwon Rose Jr.jpeg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:17, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Old
Darouet has a severe COI or two.

Sockpuppeting
Seems Dan the Plumber has resorted to sockpuppeting, despite getting a warning for the 1RR violation at the administrator noticeboard. He's been reported. EkoGraf (talk) 07:01, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * It would seem it was indeed a sockpuppet, but of a different user. EkoGraf (talk) 07:32, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I hope he hasn't done so. Unfortunately it's common in this topic area to see sock puppetry on both sides. -Darouet (talk) 15:03, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * The sock's behavior, language, edits, as well as talking on the Plumber's talk page like he is Plumber really lead me to believe it was him. But an admin said there was no ping connecting the sock and Plumber, but that he did link the account to a previously indef. blocked editor. EkoGraf (talk) 15:50, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Souliotes
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Souliotes. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Greenwald
I am cleaning up per our colleague's call for removing primary sourced content. I also removed trivia not covered by independent RS. If you have policy-based objections, a blind blanket revert is not the way to express them. I urge you to use the article talk page where this very topic is under discussion. When reasons have been clearly presented in edit summaries, it's not helpful to say there was no reason for the trimming. Thanks.  SPECIFICO talk 16:51, 13 July 2018 (UTC)


 * SPECIFICO as I have stated previously you are not welcome here on my talk page. I am neutral in your dispute with that other editor, as I can see a rationale for both sides. But your statement here, "I am cleaning up per our colleague's call for removing primary sourced content..." suggests that your edit was purposefully WP:POINTy. Please keep discussion at the Talk:Glenn Greenwald where it belongs. -Darouet (talk) 16:56, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I have no dispute with him. We are discussing editing, along with others. Don't reply here. You can always visit my talk page.  SPECIFICO talk 17:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Neighborhoods of Tel Aviv
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Neighborhoods of Tel Aviv. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sugar
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sugar. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

A cuddly tribble for you

 * Thank you very much that means a lot, especially coming from an editor like you. I apologize that I haven't been around much recently: work has been good, but also really busy, and so my various plans on Wikipedia have been stalled. But I've given myself a little geography project recently — those tend to be easier than others, because there's so much elementary geography work to be done — so I hope to be a little more active :). Hope all is well. Cheers — Darouet (talk) 18:30, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Blue Army
There is a discussion on the neutral point of view noticeboard and article talk page  on a topic you had once contributed to.Faustian (talk) 21:32, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of missing aircraft
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of missing aircraft. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Low-bandwidth editing app proposed
A low-bandwidth editing app is proposed in the Community Wishlist Survey. The app is for editing wikis over slow or expensive internet connections. You're listed as a member of WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Global perspective, and you obviously take a strong interest in the topic, so I though I'd ask your advice. The deadline for changes to the proposal is the 16th of November. Thanks! HLHJ (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth Warren
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth Warren. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Talk: Douma chemical attack
Never edit the talk page comments of other users. MrDemeanour (talk) 16:58, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi my edits  didn't change the comments of any other users, and you have since reverted yourself, and then changed my own talk page comments. Can you please revert your alteration of my text, per WP:TPO, or explain what you are trying to do here? -Darouet (talk) 17:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I tried to revert your edit to another user's comment. I clicked before the page-load Javascript had finished executing, and the wrong link got clicked. I self-reverted, and then undid the change that I had meant to undo in the first place.


 * My contributions log shows only one change to your talk page - where I asked you not to alter other user's talk-page comments. Consequently I don't know what you want me to revert. Perhaps you can send me a diff? Obviously I screwed up at least once. MrDemeanour (talk) 18:41, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * no worries — as noted by diffs above I didn't actually change anyone's talk page comments, and because you thought that I had, you actually changed mine. But my edit summary made it appear as though I might have been doing as you feared. Both of us should have been more cautious. -Darouet (talk) 18:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Michel Temer
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Michel Temer. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

comm to Darouet - pls rvw your reversion edit on article Anwar al-Awlaki
M. Darouet: Kindly take a more detailed look at the edits I made to the article on Anwar al-Awlaki (Nov 2018). You reverted my edits an hour after submitting, with the explanation that "That's a highly partisan edit, removing text stating he was American, and references to the killing of his son." Upon closer examination you will see that I did not remove those facts, but rather organized them better by putting them in the relevant subsections, and, importantly, adding more facts tying to other related Wikipedia articles and sources. The edits I proposed were not partisan, but rather the opposite - editing without deletions of facts, connecting to more sources, and adding relevant explanatory facts. One source I deleted was Scahill et al. which was a quite partisan source at democracynow.com; this is clearly appropriate under Wikipedia guidelines for NPOV. I propose you return to the comparative edits and do a more detailed review -- if you wish to revert my edits, please give them fair neutral consideration one-by-one. We both recognize that some editing concerns on politically-sensitive recent history can be subtle. One of this concerns is placement of tangential information in the introductory paragraphs. I respectfully ask you to contact me or other editors with questions, rather than a blanket reversion incorrectly accusing my edit of removing text when I actually added to the text on those facts. I'll be happy to explain any of the details of my edits.Isaclee (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)


 * thanks for your note. Your edits removed the prominent mention of the fact that Awlaki and his children, also killed, were American citizens. This is important because while thousands of people have been killed by American drone and counter-terrorism operations, it is rare for Americans to be targeted. This is one of the main reasons Awlaki is notable and this fact should be highlighted in the lead. -Darouet (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

You'd have mail...
...if you had mail enabled. Communicating telephathically might work. [pause for a moment of thought] Ah hah! You got it. ❤️  😊 Atsme ✍🏻📧 21:57, 24 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks I probably should have used stronger and more direct language in my statement... suffice to say that what was done to you might have been predictable but had nothing to do with policy, justice or making an encyclopedia. It reminds me of a great line from Catch-22, that I'll quote below:




 * Cheers, -Darouet (talk) 01:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation
Hello

Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.

We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.

Trizek (WMF), 08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation - link update
The previous message about the talk pages consultation has a broken link.

The correct link has been misinterpreted by the MassMessage tool. Please use the following link: Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Trizek (WMF), 08:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ben Shapiro
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ben Shapiro. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Antwon Rose Jr.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Antwon Rose Jr.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

You must not reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article
I suggest you self-revert. You violated the page restriction that says "You must not reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article" I'm sure you realize that violating page restrictions can result in being blocked or topic banned.- MrX 🖋 12:06, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi I have self-reverted per your request. However having looked into the matter in the article history, I'll note that you in your edit, you had reinstated this earlier edit of yours  that was challenged by reversion. Or was your earlier edit restoring long-standing text in some way I am not aware of? -Darouet (talk) 12:38, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * You are correct, which I found out moments ago when researching the article history. I will restore your version and start a discussion later.- MrX 🖋 12:48, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. -Darouet (talk) 12:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019
- MrX 🖋 12:16, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Black and white
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Black and white. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Wall Street Journal
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Wall Street Journal. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

It's what I call...
...healthy debate. If only it could be that way WP-wide. Atsme Talk 📧 19:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ugh sorry for long delay - if it was I can’t say I helped! Just one ref that I contributed. Next time I’ll do better (or that’s what I tell myself)! -Darouet (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts
Hello. Over at the Teahouse we're having a bit of a 'spring clean' by removing old entries from the list of Hosts that new users see. As you don't appear to have been very active there for quite some time, your 'host profile' has been removed from the list. But please don't let that put you off contributing again in the future - either by signing back up as a Host to assist on a regular basis, or just dropping in whenever you fancy helping out.

Thank you for all your past help and support for new users at the Teahouse. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Taiwan
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Taiwan. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Just a quickie
Darouet, I had to stop by and express my sincerest appreciation for your kind words. The few interactions I've shared with you have been most pleasant, and remain with me as fond memories. I can only imagine how wonderful WP would be if all encounters and collaborations were as collegial and respectful as ours have been. Atsme Talk 📧 19:21, 28 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and ditto. I hope you'll not be discouraged. If it's any consolation, Diderot — before, during, and after putting together the first more or less modern encyclopedia — faced endless trouble at the hands of the State, the Church, etc. But here we all are 250 years later continuing his work. -Darouet (talk) 13:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Speaking of putting together an encyclopedia, following is a behind-the-scenes look at how it's done. Thanks to for finding this masterpiece. SMirC-chuckle.svg Atsme  Talk 📧 03:59, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I rush to note that it was who brought that masterpiece (and it really is) to my attention. EEng 05:41, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not surprised to learn that has spent years (and probably over $250,000) supposedly building this encyclopedia, only to turn up at the end with some smart-ass lines from Billy Wilder :) -Darouet (talk) 04:46, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Woohoo

 * Thank you ! Hope you have a great day — Darouet (talk) 18:01, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ivanka Trump
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ivanka Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Moors murders
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Moors murders. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

US Regime Change RFC
Thank you for your contribution to that RFC survey. I guess you saw the outcome. With you being a more experienced Wikipedian, I am wondering if you would consider modifying the proposed text according to the specifications of the closing editor and resubmitting it. My writing is apparently too "POV". Best, GPRamirez5 (talk)

Please comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry
I'm sorry I got mad at you about the Iraq War in 2013.

CJK (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * thanks - though I’d note that you’re entitled to have an opinion, and I’d never begrudge you for defending it. -Darouet (talk) 22:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

For your incredible work

 * Thank you : I don't deserve an award like this nearly as much as you, but I am deeply grateful for your comments. Hoping you are well! -Darouet (talk) 13:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kate Dover
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kate Dover. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Editing help
Dear I am currently traveling and unable to edit Killing of Atatiana Jefferson; if you could have a look I would be most grateful. -Darouet (talk) 03:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * thank you! I never have time to do enough, but as you know, the tasks here are infinite... thanks for your great contributions yourself! Cheers Darouet (talk) 14:46, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

People are continuing to revert
I'd appreciate your support once again in Talk:Call-out culture. You wrote "I strongly disagree [...] that the book is undue and "cruft."" - and yet, another wikipedian arrived on the scene, 2 days ago, to revert my considered changes citing the same reason. Also, could you please tell me what the wikipedia process is to resolve "edit wars" like this? I have a feeling that these users are politically motivated to keep Call-out culture as small and less informative as possible (see the last section in the Talk page) such as to covertly censor the topic. - Sridc (talk) 01:40, 4 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Sridc, I don't exactly recall that dispute at the moment, and I'm too busy to become involved... BUT! There are great resources at Wikipedia to help with resolving disputes, and they work much better than edit wars. Please read this when you have time: WP:DISPUTE. Almost always, the process will involve bringing in a larger number of editors to consider the issue. I hope that's helpful. Sincerely, Darouet (talk) 14:53, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Gas van
Hi, I realize the discussion in Talk:Gas van has been very frustrating but we're now at RfC stage and your input would be very valuable to add some balance. Cloud200 (talk) 11:32, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

It’s that time of year!

 * Thank you what a cute polychaete! Its decorations are marvelous. I hope you really have a lovely Christmas and New Year celebration. Onto the next decade! And the encyclopedia only keeps growing :) -Darouet (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Happy New Year, Darouet!! May yours be filled with happiness and answered prayers! Atsme Talk 📧 02:17, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

DS Violation at Julian Assange
Hello Darouet. Happy New Year to you!

The Julian Assange article is under the "consensus required" discretionary sanction, to wit: '''Consensus required: All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion). This includes making edits similar to the ones that have been challenged. If in doubt, don't make the edit.'''

I challenged the addition of a letter from a list of concerned Germans by reverting it and you have now reinstated it without gaining consensus on the article talk page. Please undo your reinstatement and seek consensus for your view on the article talk page. Copying for his information, since he was the one who placed the sanctions.

Thanks, Darouet. See you on talk.

 SPECIFICO talk 21:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * This is the first time you have posted on my talk page accurately identifying a DS violation. I would self-revert, but it seems that has beaten me to it.


 * Specifico, while I would write that I appreciate your notification, I've asked you in the past not to post on my talk page, as you have used talk page posts inappropriately, including by making allegations of DS violations without evidence . Other editors (including an administrator) have described your posts on my talk page as "sub par" and consisting of "threats and accusations... but no substance... an indication of disruptive behavior" . For this reason, I am surprised you are choosing to notify me here. If you'd like to get ahold of me you can ping me at your own talk page or at a page where we are both editing. -Darouet (talk) 01:05, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

You are a star

 * Thank you that is very kind of you. I wish I had more time to edit! The world is too big :). -Darouet (talk) 15:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

+1 - smart, neutral and should be an admin. <span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">Atsme Talk 📧 15:50, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

?
I just noticed this edit, with this edit summary: "Undid revision 945247746 by SPECIFICO ..." For the life of me, I can't find any deletion by SPECIFICO of this large amount of material. -- BullRangifer (talk) 20:18, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * In reverting the hab, I added text and references explaining why. -Darouet (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay. -- BullRangifer (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year
div style="border: 4px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0;"> <div style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif;float:right;margin-bottom:20px;margin-right:10px">Happy New Year! Hello Darouet: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, --A.S. Brown (talk) 04:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC) (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Dear Darouet, thank you so much for all words. I'm so sorry for being late in getting back. I was little overwhelmed at the time. But I would take your suggestion. Thank you again for your kindness and goodwill. Best wishes for the New Year!--A.S. Brown (talk) 04:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks, this is very kind! Hope you are well. -Darouet (talk) 15:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Dear Darouet, you're welcome! Sorry for being late, but I hope all is well. Wishing you a most Happy Easter!--A.S. Brown (talk) 05:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Kiki Camarena
Your sourcing is still not reliable. You have no authority to keep adding back false information. Jaydoggmarco (talk) 20:13, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Neither you nor I have "authority," but Wikipedia policies do have authority. What sources aren't reliable? I cited five sources:
 * The book by two historians at the University of Wisconsin, and published by the University of Wisconsin Press.
 * An academic journal review article.
 * An article in the Tucson sentinel.
 * An article in USA Today.
 * An article in Fox News.
 * Every sentence I added is backed up by 1–2 references. Maybe you can tackle the claims one by one, and explain why you don't agree these are reliable or supported by reliable sources.
 * Additionally, I made a post at WP:BLPN before adding the content. You can see that post here . Feel free to comment there. I was encouraged to add the material based on available sourcing. If you can convince other editors there, it's certainly a source of authority on Wikipedia. -Darouet (talk) 21:40, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Zero Hedge
Can you find even one source that describes ZH as anything other than Libertarian or right leaning? If not, it is not a controversial statement to say that it is right leaning, with suitable sources. Ratel 🌼 (talk) 05:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Ratel 🌼, thanks for your note here. I was in the middle of replying, but I see that you, and, and , have already dug into this far more deeply on the talk page than I had realized. I'll refrain from reverting and discuss with you three over at talk. -Darouet (talk) 15:17, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Finally, it makes no sense to dump anything that you think is critical to a single paragraph, especially when it is not exactly critical but just a common fact relevant for the timeline. Orientls (talk) 06:29, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


 * You've reverted twice now: first to revert my change, and then to revert my one reversion. You should probably be treating the article as 1RR, given the editing restrictions active on COVID19 articles. -Darouet (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Replying to your message here, there is no "1RR" on all Covid-19 articles. They only fall under DS but nothing else. Orientls (talk) 18:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Covid-19 general sanctions aleret
Doug Weller talk 09:49, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Renewal of discretionary sanctions alerts
Doug Weller talk 09:50, 21 May 2020 (UTC)