User talk:Exerle

Welcome!
Hi Anselm Schmidt! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Happy editing! Viel Spaß. Grimes2 (talk) 15:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Gottfried Helnwein
Hi. I am removing this content again, because it's trivial. Everyone has opinions; not all of them need to be on Wikipedia. Please don't revert explained edits without explanations. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)


 * The stance of contemporaries on Russia's invasion of Ukraine is obviously non-trivial, especially when they are part of the public debate. But thank you for blocking me to edit. It is sad to see how much the quality of administrators on English Wikipedia has declined. Anselm Schmidt (talk) 16:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm actually standing on the shoulders of giants. Wikipedia is not a platform on which every opinion should be aired. Hey, I thought I'd do you a solid and leave that stuff on Justus Frantz--but what you added there is completely uncited, and there's a bunch of others where you just stuck it in without a semblance of a reference. The link you are adding, this, as you did on Antje Vollmer and a bunch of others, is of course completely unacceptable--first of all that was a shitty way of formatting, and second it's a screenshot of a primary source. Wikipedia administrators past and present should have a problem with that, and I'll drop a template below to indicate that this is serious business. Anyway, if you have a reliable secondary source, you can add that to the factoid in the Frantz article, as far as I'm concerned, since that person has obviously been a shameless Putin lover in public. But adding unverified or improperly verified negative BLP information, that's always going to be a big no. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If you had wanted a better formatting or sourcing you could have said so. I thought I'd add the primary source in an archived version. But as you have initially stated, you consider this information trivial, so congratulations, I will not add it anymore. Anselm Schmidt (talk) 17:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Contentious topics.