User talk:Reluctant Jedi

Welcome
 <div style="background-color: Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~) ; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started.  Happy editing! VikingDrummer (talk) 06:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)   Hello, Reluctant Jedi, and Welcome to Wikipedia!
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Getting started
 * Introduction
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Finding your way around
 * Table of contents
 * Directories and indexes
 * Department directory
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Editing articles
 * How to develop an article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Getting help
 * Frequently asked questions
 * Cheatsheet
 * Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
 * The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
 * Help pages
 * Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">How you can help
 * Community Portal
 * Join a WikiProject
 * Follow Wikipedia etiquette
 * Practice civility
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Unsourced content to Offshore financial centre and others
Hello, I noticed that you added a lot of content to the article Offshore financial centre and other financial-related articles. I noticed that you deleted some citations, and was wondering if you could add some citations to the new content you added. Most content does need to be sourced, especially if you are referring to 2021 figures and facts. Thanks. -PerpetuityGrat (talk) 13:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)


 * https://www.ifcreview.com/news/2021/august/international-tax-tjn-founders-quit-as-they-accuse-network-of-wasting-funding/ this is part of a body of TJN work, including Guzman, that are seen to be highly dubious suppositions often repeated in the press. Reluctant Jedi (talk) 19:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In order to provide some citation context along the thread, here's one that relates to the manufacturing of numbers for amplification of a political position. https://www.ifcreview.com/news/2021/august/international-tax-tjn-founders-quit-as-they-accuse-network-of-wasting-funding/ and respected tax experts who rail *against* tax avoidance each as their life's work, also discuss how erroneous the work of Zucman and TJN is https://www.taxpolicy.org.uk/2023/07/25/tjn/. Given the apparent alignment in combatting financial wrongdoing, doubtless they would encourage Zucman to produce better research that is fact-driven instead of developed hypothesis that does not withstand analysis.
 * The foregoing is not a question of my opinion but where this site has a slew of such opinions on the subject characterised as unchallenged and factual, the readers of this site are not being properly served. In fact, it's not obvious that the material I deleted or edited complies with the site's guidelines but perhaps I should have addressed this in a different way - on the talk/discussion part of the site perhaps (with citations, I know! mea culpa)? These underlying numbers are often used by the press and even government officials in some places adding to the problem of the numbers being fundamentally flawed.
 * The problem with the inputs that I deleted or corrected is that global efforts against money laundering, tax evasion, government and corporate corruption tend go against inaccurate memes, while the real perpetrators tend to enjoy the distraction created in the melee.
 * I am happy to engage on any specific edits you'd query and either provide a citation or suggested modification/deletion of what I had written. It would be useful to have a more complete, up to date and factual body of knowledge in this area. Reluctant Jedi (talk) 22:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * sorry I didn't think to check before but, of course, Dan Needle also has his own page Dan Neidle as well, for reference. Reluctant Jedi (talk) 22:33, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

There are relevant quotes included but some of the falsehoods that were corrected no longer fit with the citations, particularly where the sources had been quoted already elsewhere for context. Note that just because a closely aligned newspaper like the Guardian quotes a TJN opinion, the repetition does not morph that opinion into a fact. TJN and Murphy are discredited and routinely spout fanciful quotes, supported by flat-earthed style numbers and reports. That doesn’t help explain the real situation for anyone.

November 2023
Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 20:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)


 * was there a specific piece to which you refer? There is a a thread of related inaccurate work and opinion to these subjects include citations do newspaper articles that are themselves based on disproven data. Which content did you have issue with exactly? Reluctant Jedi (talk) 19:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * is it unfortunate error or disingenuous to ask a user to take an opportunity add citations or review work, while also applying to ban someone because you do not like a record being corrected. Happy to discuss any points I edited or additions I have made, if you're interested in improving the quality of this resource. Reluctant Jedi (talk) 19:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * a wise person once said "if we cannot say much of substance without becoming a carbon copy of the subject's website or of a tabloid news article, it is kinder to our lectrice to say nothing at all". My edits are wholly in keeping with this and I have not been shown otherwise on any addition or deletion. Reluctant Jedi (talk) 19:33, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Need help with long-term tendentious editing. Thank you. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 20:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Long term tendacious editing? There is a threat of emotive opinion being passed off as fact and when factual contact is added or irrelevant content deleted, you try to cancel the editor for not toeing that line? Is this meant to be an encyclopedia or a political opinion tool? Reluctant Jedi (talk) 19:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The article on OFCs and related involve a large subject involving a global variety of perspectives. The page previously contained a swath of statements that have *proven* to be based on manufactured assumptions and hypotheses. These findings were not by me but by tax experts who are also themselves professionally devoted to combating tax avoidance.
 * Indeed Dan Neidle has already unseated a sitting politician for his misdeeds. As experts in the subject matter, he and Richard Murphy, founder of TJN, have taken to pieces the hypotheses that made up the bulk of the Wikipedia page. They are all meant to be on the same side but Cobham and Zucman seem to be exposed for flawed and made up “research” that suits a European colonial narrative convenient for their competition for financial services business (eg look at how Luxembourg is a poor imitation of the fund industry in Delaware or Cayman) while Neidle and Murphy (with whom a variously agree and disagree from time to time) appear to be producing fact-driven data and real world analysis as well as exposing actual wrongdoing. It is frankly too much for me to edit well and I may have done a poor job in you view but this could be done better in discussion to improve the veracity of the page, which is currently (obviously) quite poor WP:NPOV . What remains, now you have restored the previous version and gone straight for WP:AOTE, is not well researched or balanced but has a series of politically partial statements with circular echo chamber citations. I have now found some citations to support what I was initially trying to improve on the page but frankly it could do with good faith honest discussion and a complete overhaul taking into account the evolving fact pattern and perhaps mentioning the international tensions at issue. Reluctant Jedi (talk) 23:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 16:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)


 * what are you doing blocking people for correcting and updating information? Prime example being the Blairmore edits. Please explain which bits were either erroneous or partisan. Why deleted details such as paras regarding Nigel Farage (his own subject altogether!) that are irrelevant to Blairmore Holdings are being objected to? Source articles were added. It's important Wikipedia is a source of information. If you have an issue with a user's edits, why wouldn't those be raised with the user to determine the validity of the information, rather than blocking the user before reviewing the same? Reluctant Jedi (talk) 19:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)