User talk:Psychloppos

A cheeseburger for you!

 * yummy ! :) Psychloppos (talk) 15:21, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Question on an edit
First of all, thank you for your work expanding Freeman on the land. I see another user has expressed something similar above. I was reading the article, though, and came across this sentence which surprised me: "Two prominent UK freeman on the land gurus are male-to-female transsexuals, Veronica Chapman and "Kate of Gaia", the latter being a Canadian expatriate who advances a New Age-flavoured version of the strawman theory." Apparently you added it in this diff recently. I removed the sentence, but was curious - why was it relevant to the article to mention that these people are transsexual? That struck me as odd. Ganesha811 (talk) 02:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * hello ; well, as you may see in the source that I used, it is Donald J. Netolitzky, a legal scholar who has written extensively about pseudolaw and its avatars (I have made extensive use of his various academic papers on the sovereign citizen movement, pseudolaw, redemption movement and strawman theory articles) who wrote that "interestingly", two prominent UK freeman on the land gurus are transsexuals. I was unsure what to make of it, but I thought it might be an interesting detail, as it illustrates how the freeman on the land ideology may attract marginalized people with unusual personalities (I guess there are not that many freeman "gurus" in the UK so I found it surprising that not one but two of the most prominent ones would be transsexual) ; and above all that it illustrates how the freeman on the land movement is more "progressive" than the original American sovereign citizen movement which is, for the most part, more right-wing (The freeman on the land movement being basically a reframing of sovereign citizen ideology for a more left-wing, "alternative", anti-globalization audience). I agree that this is anecdotal, though, and that's basically how Netolizky presents it (he does not elaborate beyond saying that it's interesting).
 * However, what I found more interesting about Kate of Gaia was that this person :
 * 1) is a Canadian expatriate in the UK, who first gained some notoriety in Canada as Wilfred Keith Thompson only to reemerge as Kate of Gaia in the UK : IMHO, this is an interesting reminder of the movement's Canadian roots and it also shows that the movement revolves around a small number of people.
 * 2) "advances a New Age-flavoured version of the strawman theory" (per Netolitzky) which illustrates the variations of "freeman" ideology.
 * 3) was somehow involved in the billboard campaign in the UK, which as far as I could see remains a mysterious affair (where did they find the money for this ?)
 * That's it, I hope I've been clear enough. Cheers ! Psychloppos (talk) 08:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I would be very careful with material like this. Speculating about "marginalized people with unusual personalities" may not only stray close to anti-trans language, it also goes beyond what is found in the source and become WP:OR. It's also worth noting that your wording in the article was essentially identical to that in Netolitzky's paper, so copyright violations are also a concern. I appreciate your contributions, just be sure to double-check for the natural tendency to extrapolate beyond what sources say. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:12, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * well, apart from the fact that transsexuals are often unfortunately marginalized, I said "unusual personalities" for lack of a better term. Kate of Gaia does seem to be an unusual character, too. I have no doubt, however, that many transsexuals have ordinary, humdrum personalities just like you and me (or at least like me, as I don't know you) so maybe "unconventional backgrounds" would have been a better term.
 * I stayed closed to Netolitzky's wording precisely because I did not want to elaborate from what he said : if you think that can be a concern, thanks for letting me know. In the future, I shall try to deviate further from the wording of the sources I use.
 * I'd like to stress that my curiousity about that anecdotal information came from the fact that I have been working mostly on the sovereign citizen movement page, which is why I came across the freeman on the land page. If you have read the sovereign citizen page, you probably remember that the movement's origins lay in far-right, white supremacist milieus : this is the organization where the "sovereign citizen" concept originated and this is one of the most notorious groups of the 1990s. Anything is possible, but I find it fair to assume that these people would not have gladly welcomed a seminar by Kate of Gaia. And even though the movement has now become very heterogeneous and includes African-Americans with idiosyncratic "Islamic" views, it is still associated with people like this. So I find it very interesting to note that the same ideology has now mutated into the freeman on the land movement which includes "New Age" gurus like Kate of Gaia. This is why I included this info, without additional comment which would have been original research.
 * Once again, since this is anecdotal I do not consider it a personal matter. What I found most interesting was that a Canadian freeman "guru" crossed the Atlantic to settle in the UK, hence bothering authorities in two different countries. If you have any idea how this little piece of information could be better reframed within the article, please let me know. If you think it's better not to include it at all, I won't take issue with it. Psychloppos (talk) 12:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it's better not to include that detail at all. As to wording, the key is to give a summary of the text's meaning without using any of the text's language. It's a tough needle to thread at times. The larger idea that "freeman-on-the-land" culture is not necessarily far-right, like other parts of the sovereign citizen movement, is worth including. Ganesha811 (talk) 17:36, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That's duly noted, in the future I'll do my best to use as little as possible of the sources' wording. I figured that I already had, but I guess you can always improve as you go. :)
 * I had already included in the article the idea that freeman-on-the-land concepts (at least in Canada) are basically sovereign citizen ideology reframed for an alternative, left-wing, "new age", cannabis-consuming audience, so I guess that's all right. Psychloppos (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

ANI
Anyone can comment at ANI, you go there to discuss what you see as user misconduct, and anyone can do that.Slatersteven (talk) 18:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you so much for your edits in helping bring that article to GA status! They are greatly appreciated.
 * Also, w/r/t Newsweek: it is not generally considered reliable post-2013 (when the company was taken over by IBT Media), but there may be quite a few exceptions to this rule. WP:NEWSWEEK says that content should be decided on a case-by-case basis (this is why it's listed as "no consensus" on the scheme, not "generally unreliable"). So I wouldn't worry too much about using it in the past, it's just that more reliable sources are preferred (especially on Good Articles) { —AFreshStart (talk) 11:57, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * you're welcome, I really enjoyed editing that page. I thought I wouldn't touch it again for a few days but since the GA review had ended, I took the liberty to add some more content today. I thought the page would look even better with Tom Hanks in the cast and a Lady Gaga soundtrack.
 * Thanks for the info about Newsweek. I didn't know the quality of its reporting had degraded so much, as it apparently did for Rolling Stone. :( Psychloppos (talk) 13:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Sovereign movement vs sovereign citizen
Eliminate the word citizen next to the word sovereign. That’s dangerous rhetoric 2601:C3:8000:1DD0:7513:6E5C:CA08:F047 (talk) 04:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello. I suggest you look up the subject a little. Cheers, Psychloppos (talk) 07:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

November 2022
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Rsk6400 (talk) 09:17, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * hello. Indeed, I often tend to forget writing an edit summary. My bad. That was especially true of my earlier contributions; in recent months, I've been trying to at least click on the "minor edit" form since a great deal of my contributions are minor edits and typo corrections (my own typos, generally). Thanks for the reminder, however, I'll try to keep that in mind. Psychloppos (talk) 10:35, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your considerate reply. Rsk6400 (talk) 14:26, 13 November 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) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Talk pages
Can you please stop altering your posts once they have been replied to, it can change context. Slatersteven (talk) 16:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think it has changed context. I was just trying to explain my thoughts more clearly. Psychloppos (talk) 16:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)