|
User talk:Prunesqualer/Archives/2021/September
Julian Assange“What SPECIFICO said” is not very satisfactory. Not my problem. Yours, perhaps, but not mine. --Calton | Talk 16:05, 8 September 2021 (UTC) Space between text and opening ref tagPrunesqualer, I hesitate to raise what is admittedly a tiny matter of style, but I have noticed both in your edits of Julian Assange and your comments at Talk:Julian Assange a consistent extraneous space between text and opening Questionable edit at Julian AssangeYour edit today, in which you removed a word from a reliably sourced direct quotation, is unacceptable. Please do not continue to sabotage the Assange BLP in this way. Basketcase2022 (talk) 16:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC) Basketcase2022I wonder did you see my talk page comment explaining the edit? as I said: “As I mentioned earlier I now not happy with my edits which include Assange’s “crazed radical feminist ideology” quote followed by: “a view that he repeated in later interviews”. I now realise this is somewhat misleading as the other two known similar comments did have some differences - notably they did not say “crazed” (see above). So I’m removing the crazed part of the quote as the remaining “radical feminist ideology” is reflected in the other cited quotes. If someone prefers to take out the “a view that he repeated in later interviews” thus resolving the issue I’m fine - but we can’t say both and be true to the sources...” As explained: you can either have the “crazed” word included or the “a view that he repeated in later interviews” you can’t have both and stay true to the source. Prunesqualor billets_doux 16:26, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
This [[1]] is an unacceptable attack on fellow users. Please remove it.Slatersteven (talk) 18:26, 13 September 2021 (UTC) Please remove it or I will report you, per wp:npa.Slatersteven (talk) 11:48, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Don't make personal remarks on article talk pagesOn Assange, you continue to make personal remarks about other editors instead of discussing any issues you may wish to raise concerning their edits. Please read WP:TPG. If you continue this behaviour, you may be blocked from editing. SPECIFICO talk 17:44, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
AssangeYou need to let talk page discussion proceed to give time and space for you to build consenus, if possible, for your preferred article text. There is never a valid reason to reinstate unsourced article text. Moreover, in talk page discussions, in order to reach a constructive consensus, you would need to respond to other editors' stated concerns. Mere repetition of your complaints is not responsive discussion of the issue of DUE WEIGHT. Please give a careful read to our page WP:NPOV and to WP:ONUS, which cover this. @Slatersteven: and I have commented on the article talk page. You have not made any substantive argument or gained any editors who argue that your edits were not UNDUE and failing VERIFICATION. I will ask you one time to undo your precipitous reinstatement of your edit and allow time for you to gain consensus on talk. I will also warn you that your behaviour over the past month or two is heading you for an enforcement action and a block or ban if you are not willing or able to slow down, stop personalizing your comments and attitudes, stop accusing and disparaging other editors and their work, and to work patiently and collaboratively. SPECIFICO talk 15:05, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Assange talk
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. |
