User talk:HiLo48/Archive 1

For keeping the baddies at bay...
Feel free to move this barnstar to wherever in your user space you'd prefer to have it. bodnotbod (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Humor at Protected Pages
As someone who lives on an island (granted its a VERY large island) perhaps you are unaware of what the rules are on the Mainland (thats what we call it) for articles that may be considered political in nature; These are just some basic guidelines to assure the safety and sanity of your fellow editors. A good rule of thumb to follow is that if the right is obviously humorous 3 times in a row, some humor from the left will be tolerated since the conversation will be ended via "shrink wrap" at any moment. BTW, sorry about the spelling of humour. Buster Seven   Talk  20:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Any cross-party hugfest can only be initiated by the right,
 * 2) Any internal hugfest (or support of one another) within the right should NOT be constued as anything more than friendliness and cheerful banter,
 * 3) Any internal hugfest (or support of one another) within the left could, should and will result in immediate blocks and bans to the active participants and severe reprimands to any editors that were seen smiling in the general vicinity.

Thanks for information
 Hello HiLo48, This lousy t-shirt has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message..

Compliments on your sang froid
I can't help but admire your reaction the other day to the namecalling you were subjected to by Encyclopedia91. You must have the patience and forbearance of a saint! I know I would have reacted quite differently. You are a model for us all. Sincerely, -- Kenatipo  speak! 21:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice Koekjes


Buster7 has given you a Nice Koekjes which promote fellowship, goodwill and WikiLove. Hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the good flavor of Nice Koekjes around Wiki World by giving someone else one. Maybe to a friend or, better yet, to someone you have had disagreements with in the past. Nice Biscuits are very tasty and have been known to calm even the most savage beast. Enjoy! Buster Seven   Talk 


 * I just gave a koekje to an Aussie friend, User:Alastair Haines and I thought of you. It's fresh. I made it last night. Buster Seven   Talk  14:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Some words I'm working on
Been thinking about this criticism issue for a while. Probably not the ideal place to say this, but I want to try putting the words together. I think criticism sections are almost always going to be inappropriate in Wikipedia. Just about everyone has somebody who disagrees with them about something. Some, like outspoken atheists, will have more than many from conservative religious parts of society who disagree. That's a given. We cannot possibly list all the criticism, so what's the point of listing any? We should just describe what's significant about someone (i.e. why they have an article here) and let others decide on the merits of their actions and views. The same goes for people significant for their strong religious views. List those views, and let it stand. Going any further will inevitably create the debate of "how much further?" So, no criticism sections. OK?
 * I agree with you 90+%. Criticism sections are lazy writing, often places for sneaking in their point-of-view. They are often a way of taking an obscure critic and giving them promotion by adding their opinions. I often get the impression that some editors start with a point of view and then web search until they find some obscure opinion piece and add it to the article. In these cases, only reliable sources and notable ones will do. Instead of putting criticism in its own ghetto, if legit it belongs next to the ideas being presented. Thank you for bringing up an important issue. --Javaweb (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
 * You two might want to check out Criticism, an essay that discourages the existence of criticism sections and goes over the main points against them.AerobicFox (talk) 22:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I'd have to say I like the criticism/controversy sections. So many times I've turned to Wikipedia because I was pretty sure I was dead set against someone/something, but couldn't quite remember why. Being able to go straight to these sections has saved a lot of time. Netanyahuserious (talk) 07:50, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
For your sport work. :)

LauraHale (talk) 01:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC) 

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page. In this issue: Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->
 * Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
 * Research: The most recent DR data
 * Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
 * Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
 * DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
 * Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
 * Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #2)

 * To add your named to the newsletter delivery list, please sign up here

'''This edition The Olive Branch is focusing on a 2nd dispute resolution RfC. Two significant proposals have been made. Below we describe the background and recent progress and detail those proposals. Please review them and follow the link at the bottom to comment at the RfC. We need your input!'''

Until late 2003, Jimmy Wales was the arbiter in all major disputes. After the Mediation Committee and the Arbitration Committee were founded, Wales delegated his roles of dispute resolution to these bodies. In addition to these committees, the community has developed a number of informal processes of dispute resolution. At its peak, over 17 dispute resolution venues existed. Disputes were submitted in each venue in a different way.
 * Background

Due to the complexity of Wikipedia dispute resolution, members of the community were surveyed in April 2012 about their experiences with dispute resolution. In general, the community believes that dispute resolution is too hard to use and is divided among too many venues. Many respondents also reported their experience with dispute resolution had suffered due to a shortage of volunteers and backlogging, which may be due to the disparate nature of the process.

An evaluation of dispute resolution forums was made in May this year, in which data on response and resolution time, as well as success rates, was collated. This data is here.


 * Progress so far

Leading off from the survey in April and the evaluation in May, several changes to dispute resolution noticeboard (DRN) were proposed. Rather than using a wikitext template to bring disputes to DRN, editors used a new javascript form. This form was simpler to use, but also standardised the format of submissions and applied a word limit so that DRN volunteers could more easily review disputes. A template to summarise, and a robot to maintain the noticeboard, were also created.

As a result of these changes, volunteers responded to disputes in a third of the time, and resolved them 60% faster when compared to May. Successful resolution of disputes increased by 17%. Submissions were 25% shorter by word count.(see Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Statistics - August compared to May)

Outside of DRN other simplification has taken place. The Mediation Cabal was closed in August, and Wikiquette assistance was closed in September. Nevertheless, around fifteen different forums still exist for the resolution of Wikipedia disputes.

Given the success of the past efforts at DR reform, the current RFC proposes we implement:
 * Proposed changes

1) A submission gadget for every DR venue tailored to the unique needs of that forum. 2) A universal dispute resolution wizard, accessible from Dispute resolution.
 * Similar to the one that was deployed, with great success, to the DRN.
 * Structured based on the specific issues most commonly dealt with at each forum.
 * Designed to improve the quality of requests for DR and the efficiency of DR at that forum.
 * Applicable at following noticeboards: Dispute resolution, Neutrality, Reliable Sources, Original Research, Biographies of Living Persons, Notability noticeboard, Fringe theories, Conflict of Interest, Ethnic and cultural conflicts, External links, Third opinion, Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee.
 * Forms will merely fill out any existing templates (such as Arbcom's) and create a markup-free form in line with specific noticeboard practices otherwise.
 * Example form fields: What pages are involved? What users are involved? What is the issue? What resolution is desired?
 * This wizard would ask a series of structured questions about the nature of the dispute.
 * It would then determine to which dispute resolution venue a dispute should be sent.
 * If the user agrees with the wizard's selection, s/he would then be asked a series of questions about the details of the dispute (for example, the usernames of the involved editors).
 * The wizard would then submit a request for dispute resolution to the selected venue, in that venue's required format (using the logic of each venue's specialized form, as in proposal #1). The wizard would not suggest a venue which the user has already identified in answer to a question like "What other steps of dispute resolution have you tried?".
 * Similar to the way the DRN request form operates, this would be enabled for all users. A user could still file a request for dispute resolution manually if they so desired.
 * Coding such a wizard would be complex, but the DRN gadget would be used as an outline.
 * Once the universal request form is ready (coded by those who helped create the DRN request form) the community will be asked to try out and give feedback on the wizard. The wizard's logic in deciding the scope and requirements of each venue would be open to change by the community at any time.

3) Additionally, we're seeking any ideas on how we can attract and retain more dispute resolution volunteers.

Please share your thoughts at the RfC.

--The Olive Branch 18:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I have to record this before it gets buried
"...user HiLo48 has a biased towards Netball and against male sport's."

I think it's a gem.

HiLo48 (talk) 06:24, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * LOL. Yes, I do laugh when I see how some people think they can advance the position of their political favourites. Here in Australia, our current Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, could be said to have broken a promise she made on a carbon tax before the last election. (There's even some debate about that.) But the opposition and some shock-jocks decided to call here a liar over it. That has led to the (not) absolutely hilarious habit among her sworn enemies of calling her Juliar. After the first couple of times, even those amused by it initially were surely no longer amused, but two and a half years later it still happens. Doubt if anyone will change their vote over it now. HiLo48 (talk) 02:55, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Precious
  "please stop wasting your time and ours"

Thank you for investing your time in greeting IPs and politely telling some "Please stop wasting your time and ours", for typo fixing and quality reverts, for working in this place although it is as it is, but challenging the status quo, - I wish you luck, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 512th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Wow! HiLo48 (talk) 23:20, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Seven years ago, you were recipient no. 512 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:42, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Some people should live in a bubble, without internet or human contact if so easily offended. Swearing is a wonderful gift to humanity when used properly ...ツ Jenova  20  (email) 10:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)



I'm a bit of a student of people taking offence. Choosing to be offended by "bore the shit out of..." guarantees that one will be pretty frequently offended. I do wonder what harm such people think is being done. I chose to do some vineyard labouring a few years back (I live in a wine region), and was chastised by my fellow workers for not swearing enough! They were a great bunch of people. Did tend to call a spade a fucking shovel though. My state government here in Australia has had a very successful, long lived road safety campaign built around the saying "bloody idiot". Should I be offended? HiLo48 (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No, of course not. There is a world of difference between being offended and choosing to take offence, and another light-year between choosing to take offence and erecting dayglo safety barriers around the "offending" object in question, to alert unwitting passers-by to the fact that they, too, may be exposed to the perilous choice as to whether or not to take offence. It's all bollocks, really.  Oops. -  Ka renjc (talk) 11:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


 * - Better than any explanation I could think of. Thanks ツ Jenova  20  (email) 12:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thank you.

LauraHale (talk) 12:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC) 

A Barnstar for you

 * Thank you heaps. Being a pain in the arse to tendentious editors who won't accept consensus is one of my specialities. Have you read WP:BLUE yet? HiLo48 (talk) 05:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Wear it as a badge of honour HiLo =] ツ Jenova  20  (email) 09:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I will! HiLo48 (talk) 09:25, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Have you read don't drink the consensus koolaid yet? Essays are not hard and fast rules they are rough guidelines at best about how we should interact with eachother as editors in a perfect world which are not actual wikipedia rules or guidelines.


 * Also read, It's easier to find a citation than to argue over why it is not needed --Orestes1984 (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Have you had that big adventure and travelled to the other side of the Barassi Line to see what it's really like there yet? You don't need injections. Can probably get a JetStar flight for under $100. Alternatively, or in addition, you could actually show good faith and believe what other editors tell you. HiLo48 (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Your draft submission Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka was accepted
 Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Northamerica1000(talk) 11:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you. HiLo48 (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

 * Thanks. HiLo48 (talk) 02:27, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

 * Thank you. Many don't. I get in the way of their POV pushing and promotion of irrational thinking. HiLo48 (talk) 21:36, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * That's cool. And so is the beer. I note that the offender on True Blue Crew has a temporary block. It will be interesting to see if it has a long term effect. HiLo48 (talk) 06:14, 12 August 2018 (UTC)


 * It's so strange how these folks can't handle the truth about their own beliefs. I doubt that the block will have any effect, they probably think it's a conspiracy.Bacondrum (talk) 07:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Yep. HiLo48 (talk) 07:11, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion about your talk page.
I suggest that you use some sort of talk page archiving, your talk page is huge. You can look at Help:Archiving a talk page, if you need help on how to archive a talk page. Aceing_Winter_Snows_Harsh_Cold (talk) 22:16, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * An Archive Bot, would do the trick. GoodDay (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Archive Bot
Howdy, HiLo. Recommend ya get yourself an archive bot for your talkpage :) GoodDay (talk) 03:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestion. I might clean this up a bit, but I don't actually want to hide a lot of this stuff. HiLo48 (talk) 03:17, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
You're the one who welcomed me! I haven't forgotten you. Hope things are fine over there in Australia! Firestar464 (talk) 10:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!


Sk1018 (talk) 15:53, 27 November 2021 (UTC) 

♥Kakaart12 (talk) 10:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year, HiLo48!


Happy New Year! HiLo48, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Abishe (talk) 19:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

A kitten for you!
Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia!

Caligulady (talk) 10:35, 20 April 2022 (UTC) 

BL
Howdy. I owed you a favour (forget 'exactly' what it was you did for me, but it was good), so I sent out input requests at the Rugby league & Rugy union WikiProjects, to help break any stalemates at the Barassi Line discussion. GoodDay (talk) 15:22, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Tom Springfield
This edit - brother, not sister (?!). Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Of course. Thanks. Fixed. HiLo48 (talk) 07:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Special:Diff/1116148015
I realise that perhaps "mainland Australia" was likely also a misleading term, but I've tried to clarify that it's the tallest if external territories aren't included. Does that work out? While I'm all for going with common usage (and this would make sense for a travel guide), but for an encyclopedia, I don't think including misleading facts are useful. FWIW, the gallery uses "mainland Australia", but that's a discussion for another day. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Writing and civilization
The opening section in Civilization lists writing disregarding the Incas, the section in the chapter below omits.--Maxaxa (talk) 04:44, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Bill Gates
I didn't remove anyone else's comments on the edit request; those were my own remarks. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 16:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> 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) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

First Nations peoples and Indigenous peoples
Hi @HiLo48!

Firstly, I would like to thank you for being a Wikipedia editor for such a long time, I have seen you on the Talk page for Racism in Australia for a while.

The context in which we are changing 'Indigenous' to 'First Nations' will only affect articles discussing the collective names used to describe Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Only this specific grouping of Indigenous peoples. This is not a site-wide change for every instance of 'Indigenous' to be changed to 'First Nations', as some Indigenous peoples from other countries do prefer the name. This change is only for the collective name used for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

I understand that Terminology can change over time that is why I created the talk page template based on the Australian Government Style Guide, it would be a central location for editors to update accordingly.

Now, I am confused as to why you keep reverting and then saying discuss on the talk page? I have been creating sections on talk pages to discuss the change, and I feel that changing Indigenous to First Nations is a minor change.

Basically:

Indigenous to First Nations = No change

Indigenous Australians to First Nations Australians = change

Indigenous peoples to First Nations peoples = no change

History of Indigenous Australians to History of First Nations Australians = change

Aboriginal Australians = No change

Torres Strait Islanders to Torres Strait Islander peoples = change

This is not too big of a change, I repeat, this will only apply to the collective name used to describe the specific ethnic groups of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

I just want Wikipedia to use culturally appropriate and respectful language when writing with, for or about '''First Nations Australians. '''

I hope this makes sense, and I hope that you reconsider the reversions you have made.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

AverageFraud (talk) 11:13, 2 December 2022 (UTC)


 * This will be similar to how you explain soccer in Australia User:HiLo48 if that makes more sense. AverageFraud (talk) 11:20, 2 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @User:AverageFraud - I have made a comment at Template talk:First Nations Australians. Buggered if I know if that's appropriate, because you seem to be on ridiculously certain and too far advanced down many paths with this change, with no consultation at all with others that I have seen up to this stage. A real scattergun approach to several articles all at once. Far too many of what you describe as "No change" above are, in my mind, quite major changes. Just hold your horses! HiLo48 (talk) 22:35, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Views on Americans
Hello HiLo. I noticed your comment at WP:Teahouse and (despite them coming off as rather rude imo) I checked your userpage as I hadn't seen you before and saw your "Who Am I?" section and the stuff regarding America. Figured I'd say that, while I am an American, I do share some of your views on the country. I mainly blame politics on the issues (cause when has politics solved anything?). I really don't like a lot of the views seen from those outside the country, but a lot of them are true (well, not really a lot of the sterotypes like Americans love their guns, not all of us do). Wish there was something I could do but oh well. If you really think about it we're no worse than Britain when they were colonizing everything they could get their hands on (or maybe it's they didn't actually colonize pretty much everything and the memes just exaggerated it). Anyways I'd just figured I would tell you that I share some of your views despite being an American just so there aren't any problems in the future. ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 20:12, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The etymology page I was directed to said "chiefly US, journalism". The problem is not that Americans do things differently. It's that, firstly, too many Americans are unaware that things are done differently in the rest of the world, and secondly, partly because of the first point, have never considered that what they do may not be the the best way for everyone to do things. For example, I reckon that around a couple of times a month (could I say fortnightly?) I recorrect a change of Australian or British spelling in an article on an Australian or British subject to American spelling. These changes are obviously mostly made in ignorance. HiLo48 (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. I actually enjoy learning about how things are done elsewhere in the world and find the different cultures interesting. I do see how changing english variants is annoying. IF an article is written in something other than American english then I will always do my best to try and write it in the correct English variant. I sometimes get it wrong since I"m mostly exposed to British English (altho there are still some BrEngish spellings I only learned from wikipedia such as "install" only having 1 L in british english). ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545 23:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

BLP violation
Please read WP:BLP. By the way, make sure you're constantly watching your articles 24/7 for the rest of your life, because otherwise people like me will come around at any given moment and try to get them in accordance with WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, and WP:SYN and then they won't be on message anymore. Yikes! 108.18.156.124 (talk) 13:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The content whose removal I reverted was well sourced, and obviously true. I saw no valid reason for its removal. HiLo48 (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * you contacted me on the 11th, did you revert my edits?
 * they were all on the talk page. None of them broke rules so why were they all reverted?!2603:7080:CB3F:5032:A154:312D:43D8:F4A2 (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you're talking about. I wasn't the editor who reverted your changes. I simply welcomed you to Wikipedia using one of our standard templates. HiLo48 (talk) 00:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * right, but man. it's something, the big editors can apparently delete comments even fully cited links even from what they Deem Reliable sources and STILL delete them.
 * So. Have you ever asked why no one challenges the assertion that the decline in European numbers is somehow "natural"? That when reliable sources refer to Europeans aka Whites as declining, they simultaneously celebrate this decline as Diversity and claim that noticing is believing in a conspiracy theory. There is nothing natural about several hundred million dollars/yr being spent on birth control advertising, population control/environmental advertising & birth control measures tax funded even against the consent of those opposing their decline.
 * When the Pill Became legal in the US a massive campaign was funded with many top celebrities and "influencers" (not called as such in that time) to get as many young women to USE THE PILL. The concrete result of this, seen in US census Document 1990 Section Table 16. Age and Sex by Race and Hispanic Origin: 1990 was a 8.5% decrease in White Births, an INCREASE in Black Births. After Roe vs Wade, again backed by hundreds of millions of Dollars advertising, the 1970's saw a 17.%% White Birth Drop.
 * Now, these are in the US Census bureau Public records, yet when i mentioned this in the talk Page for White Population Decline, my post was deleted. (shadow deleting posts that don't violate rules? what are wikipedias admins up to?) It's one thing to publicly disagree, but another to delete all of a person's contributions so people on the sidelines are in the dark. I suspect they have something to hide. Eg, the being complicit in violating the Genocide Convention: Article III section e: https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf
 * The US and European nations simultaneously gave a simple, cheap pill so women never had to get pregnant, since then in US, UK, Germany, Poland, etc births fell 65-70% and never turned around, now these same nations sent millions of Military Age males "refugees" to occupy europe. Since the Ukraine invasion, real refugees, young women, have been forced to stay with these men. This was how the Genocide in Bosnia and the Uygur genocide occur. Segregate the men, rape the women. What can we call this? the killing of millions of European babies, the sterilization {temporary or permanent} of millions of European women, the day-and-night racial demonization of Native Europeans as Colonizers and Polluters. looking at the budgets, it's a several hundred Billion Dollar/Euro undertaking that's continued for 60 plus years.
 * Now i noted one of your posts about Gun Control. Ask, where would the Armenians or ww2 jews be if they had access to cheap guns? Especially semi-autos. Or the tutsi of rwanda. The UN had guns but didn't fire one shot to help them. US police in 2020 didn't fire 1 shot to stop stores being looted & burned, forcing Kyle to take the law into his hand. When the govt refuses to do its job, or worse, creates the mobs/death squads, it becomes the citizens obligation to fight evil.
 * My apologies for this running on. At least twitter allows even a slight open debate now. Wiki will never allow any debate on truth in Good Faith2603:7080:CB3F:5032:A154:312D:43D8:F4A2 (talk) 01:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * You are absolutely right. Wikipedia (not Wiki - that means something else) has no interest in debate on such matters. See WP:NOTAFORUM. HiLo48 (talk) 02:24, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. This edit reason - specifically Grow up!!!! to someone trying to help but recognising circular off-topic discussion - is the only personal attack that page has seen today. I don't know what you think you get from accusing someone else of personal attacks, since there is nothing to 'win' there. Kingsif (talk) 02:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Whatever I wrote that upset you came after you accused me of pointlessly debating. I need say no more. HiLo48 (talk) 02:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Pointlessly debating involved me, too, calling it what it is, is not an attack. I don't know if you actually think you upset me or are trying to make it out so to make yourself feel superior (going with the latter, especially after I need say no more, yikes at the maturity), but make no mistake, you cannot excuse your behaviour by claiming the other party is emotive: if you didn't actually read the message here, which it seems like you didn't, it is warning you that literally yelling at people to grow up because you don't like talking to them is an actual personal attack, and you will be reported if you continue with this shitty attitude. Kingsif (talk) 02:33, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, far too many words. All I can tell is that you don't like what I write. HiLo48 (talk) 02:36, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I see that your posts, have also been hatted. Not a very pleasant experience, participating in that RFC. Which is why I've just walked away from it. GoodDay (talk) 03:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Likewise. We have obvious ownership issues there. In fact, coming from Australia, where Wikipedia has decided after much agony that the game is to be called soccer, there are major ownership issues over the name football. I truly don't understand the intensity of feelings among those who cannot accept soccer as a name for the game anywhere. HiLo48 (talk) 03:57, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I give you credit. You've more patients then I. GoodDay (talk) 04:02, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the error on my edit
I am not sure what just happened. Thank you for reverting the error. Petra0922 (talk) 03:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Please don't ruin new years'
I ve been watching NYC ball drop ever since 2020. Every year they would perform "Imagine", either before or right after the drop. You want me to sounce YouTube live streams? Please, this is ridiculous. Do watch them yourself. You'll know this is true. EVERY. YEAR. Imagine is being performed. Sometimes it's a black girl, sometimes it's white. But every year it's a tradition. Please let's not edit war on new years' but if you insist I'm going to revert because I know I'm right and you're not. Think about it please. 104.163.138.105 (talk) 05:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm in Australia. How bloody likely is it that I will know what happens 14,000 km away. Do you know what my city does on New Years Eve? HiLo48 (talk) 05:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait, how come Australia tells NYC what not to do on NY? The song has been performed in Times Square ever since 1986. Jimmy Kimmel has just said so. I found it both arrogant and disgraceful for you to come to our NY eve to ask for ridiculous "sources" even though I've already specified it twice. Please visit NYC at least once in your lifetime or do watch the stream I'm alluding to. Anyway, I'm giving you two hours then I'll revert. Happy new year's, --104.163.138.105 (talk) 05:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Just do something that conforms with our policies, especially Reliable sources. HiLo48 (talk) 05:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh my god you're not helpful. Talk about Australians being friendly (I hope not all of them are like yourself, sorry if too harsh). --104.163.138.105 (talk) 06:06, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for digging up a source. It's useful, but doesn't say quite what you initially claimed (no mention of balls), so I have slightly edited it, and moved it to a better location in the article. HiLo48 (talk) 11:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, HiLo48!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! HiLo48, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 17:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 17:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023
Your recent editing history at 2026 FIFA World Cup 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Bullshit! I reverted an edit NOT accompanied by an Edit summary. I did not breach the three revert rule. YOU are the one not following the rules here. HiLo48 (talk) 03:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, and how to deal with editors correcting my edits with their opinions rather than facts
Hi HiLo, and thanks for the welcome.

I have recently edited various articles, including with quoted references, and found myself aghast at them being reverted by self appointed editors, who I might say have not posted on their home pages any qualifications on the topic whatsoever.

My process of becoming an active editor has resulted in my beginning to question the accuracy of Wikipedia entirely.

How do you deal with this?

Sideshowsurfer (talk) 03:41, 5 January 2023 (UTC)


 * My main recommendation would be to make sure you engage with the other editors on article Talk pages. Describe there any major changes you plan to do (such as page moves) before you do them. HiLo48 (talk) 03:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Luther College
Hi, It has come to my attention that you seem to have quite an interest in the preservation of the Luther College page that we have had a few controversies on. I also noticed that you have listed yourself as a secondary school teacher on your page. Simply out of curiosity (and by no means must you answer), are you a teacher at this school? -Ash AshKmo (talk) 08:23, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It's irrelevant. I keep an eye on lots of school articles. HiLo48 (talk) 09:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Reverting information on Carey Wikipedia Page
Hello HiLo48, your comments referring to cited information on the Carey Wikipedia page was uncalled for due to the information that was already cited and backed by other sources. Also, your personal attack on Carey through my apparent grammar was also quite rude and inappropriate. I understand that I am going beyond my league regarding my conflict of interest, however common decency should not be shelved simply because of that conflict. I would advise for you to revert those changes that were actually making the information clearer and more concise for the reader. I ask you of this, due to my inability to edit due to the conflict of interest, which I will do my best to follow in future. Carey3146 (talk) 09:47, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You are doing so much wrong on that article now, you are actually doing damage to the image of the school. One thing you need to do is use more edit summaries. There is no way we can know that something is sourced elsewhere if you don't tell us it is, and where. I am not reverting anything. HiLo48 (talk) 10:04, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, I understand about the summaries, but one can still see what has been changed and thus, what is being sourced. Also, damaging the image of the School is an over dramatic statement, when there is more information about a Wikipedia page that required further information that it had lack for quite some time. Carey3146 (talk) 10:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You have already gone far beyond what is typical in a school article in Wikipedia. More would not be an improvement. HiLo48 (talk) 10:20, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * So are you saying that this Wikipedia article has too much information? Carey3146 (talk) 20:10, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, as do many other school articles. HiLo48 (talk) 22:01, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Including Scotch College? Isn't it in the interest of Wikipedia to gather further information about a particular topic or just to be stagnate and rigid? This view seems contradictory to the core foundational intentions of Wikipedia. Carey3146 (talk) 23:26, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia content is meant to be significant information, not unimportant trivia. See WP:DUE. HiLo48 (talk) 23:35, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand that a balanced article with reliable sourced information is crucially important in any article including this one. However, the information that I have included most recently, is not one that consist of the linked rules that you have used. It also says, "Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public." I would advise that because what I altered was properly sourced and balanced in nature, that what I wrote was not breaking any rules according to this quote. These views on 'weight' should not be determined by You or I, but by the merit of the source and the information that it provides. Also, if you call the history of the school 'trivia' then your definition on the importance of an intuition's history probably needs to be refined. Carey3146 (talk) 00:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I look at the content of articles on schools from the perspective of someone who has actually worked in over thirty schools, and visited many more. ALL schools try to get their students to think their schools are somehow special and unique, as part of developing a more cooperative and hard working student cohort. It can go too far, but it's generally a good thing. So lots of words get written about this stuff. It's usually accurate, but it's mostly not important, NOR is it unique. HiLo48 (talk) 00:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand the importance of once’s experience in education. I also know as a former school student, that this is the case sometimes. However, I do dispute that the information that I am providing is unhelpful. I believe and reinforced by the reliable sources used, that what I am including is more than mildly amusing but rather factual, informative and useful for some. Carey3146 (talk) 07:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

\ The information may be factual, informative and useful to some, but that is entirely beside the point. From not everything - A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. There is way too much non-encyclopaedic information in the Carey article, much of it of little to no interest to non-alumni of the school. - <b style="color: darkblue">Nick Thorne</b> <sup style="color: darkblue">talk 10:24, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I think you will find, that the vast majority of information added by myself will be useful to more than just alumni. Carey3146 (talk) 10:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Baby's weight
Thanks for only reverting part of my additions to Australian English. I suffer guilt trips when I add things that are bleeding obvious to me and might be interesting to others but almost impossible to reference. The baby's weight thing, and the "quarter-acre" block (which I refrained from mentioning) probably say more about my age than anything else Doug butler (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, I'm old too. ;-) I totally understand where you're coming from. Being closely related to a doctor, I am told that hospitals stopped reporting babies weights in lbs and ozs at least ten years ago, making it harder for new mothers (who are too young these days to have used those units themselves) to tell grandmothers the weights in imperial units. Some oldies might still do the conversion themselves, but I suspect it's pretty rare. The "quarter-acre" block is an interesting one. For reasons I never understood, real estate agents were not forced to change their advertising measurements to imperial at the same time as everyone else. Quite recently I've seen rural properties still advertised in acres. HiLo48 (talk) 02:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)