User talk:Dlthewave

To submit a Personal Attack or Baseless Accusation, please click here.

DS alert

I am aware of the following discretionary sanctions: The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the September 11 attacks, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Abortion, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the Balkans, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding discussions about the integration of Wikidata on the English Wikipedia, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the Electronic cigarette topic area, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Falun Gong, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them, broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Liancourt Rocks, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Landmark Worldwide, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Muhammad, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Longevity, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Prem Rawat, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the Shakespeare authorship question, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the Senkaku Islands dispute, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Scientology, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding the Transcendental Meditation movement, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding The Troubles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

[[File:This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding Waldorf education, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.|25px]]

{{{1}}}

Template:Z33

–dlthewave ☎ 16:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Confederate monuments

I was hoping you'd comment on a matter at the Removal of Confederate monuments and memorials talk page.--MagicatthemovieS

Social media addiction

Hello thankyou for your help in pointing out that many references were unusable in the article social media addiction. I have taken into account all yours and other considerations from other wikis and propose changing the article to what I am currently working on here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:E.3/sandbox. Can you please help with checking the citations due to my conflict of interest disclosed multiple times. I wish to develop consensus especially around the citations. Thankyou very much. E.3 (talk) 05:26, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your help again do you think any of these images would be OK? I only took the first one. They called it QI on commons, whatever that means really

Images The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

THx E.3 (talk) 15:15, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

I added those two pics there they appear to be the least artsy and directly related to the parts cited and shown. If you think

should be on it let me know, or just another one of the meds in the commons. But i think its probably enough images now though. Any thoughts appreciated. E.3 (talk) 16:14, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

It depends on the context of how and where you want to use the images, but the short answer is likely to be "no". They would make great magazine illustrations but don't seem appropriate for an encyclopedia. Images on Wikipedia should show the subject in a straightforward manner, minimizing "artistic" editing and embellishments. For example, although your dollar bill photo meets the Quality image requirements (great shot by the way), I didn't even notice the pill the first time I looked at it and I'm not sure how it illustrates social media addiction. The subject should be prominent and any other elements should be non-distracting. Likewise, computer code would be better illustrated with a head-on shot of a computer screen, and it would need to have a direct connection to social media addiction. I'm not sure how the black-and-white photo of children of the selective-focus shot of refrigerator magnets would be useful here. It would be best to post questions on the article talk page if you would like to discuss further. –dlthewave ☎ 16:39, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

2nd RfD announce: Wikipedia:DAILYMAIL

There is another redirect discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 11#Wikipedia:DAILYMAIL. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:34, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Seriously you've been the best

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		its the toughest topic in the world presently in my opinion. You've helped us do it. E.3 (talk) 07:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Warning

Your message isn't appreciated. Read the assessment. The vote was cast because of the inclusion of one source. That is now gone. Had editors been given the chance to reassess then they may have changed their minds. You've effectively allowed Koffman to take this article off the list by his own volition. There is nothing about that, that is remotely appropriate. Dapi89 (talk) 15:47, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

• Op-ed: Random Rewards Rejected
  Lab rats deflate research to be performed on the Wikipedia community.

• In focus: The Collective Consciousness of Admin Userpages
  Did you know that there was an admin who thought that the metaphor of the mop was a joke, and now they know it's not?

• News and notes: WMF staff turntable continues to spin; Endowment gets more cash; RfA continues to be a pit of steely knives
  Rude or just forgetful? Eight-year WMF manager has disappeared; Facebook gives a million bucks, gets no love.

• In the media: The Signpost's investigative story recognized, Wikipedia turns 18 and gets a birthday gift from Google, and more editors are recognized
  Heroes and unsung heroes: many good news stories about the work we are all doing together.

• Discussion report: The future of the reference desk
  Plus: plagiarism from Wikipedia, user categories, and admin activity requirements.

• Featured content: Don't miss your great opportunity
  Get yourself lost in 1730's Paris, and a wide range of other recently promoted content.

• Arbitration report: An admin under the microscope
  Snowman flames newbies? Or just oversensitive snowflakes?

• Traffic report: Death, royals and superheroes: Avengers, Black Panther
  The most popular articles of 2018 include a cornucopia of superheroes (Avengers: Infinity War)

• Technology report: When broken is easily fixed
  Emergency server switch goes smoothly; technical glitches resolved; a new way to transfer files to Commons.

• Gallery: Let us build a memorial fit for such pain and suffering
  A tour of some of the world's greatest memorials courtesy the Prime Minister of India.

• News from the WMF: News from WMF
  The world’s largest photo contest, a $1 million gift, Wikipedia’s birthday, WF appoints Valerie D'Costa.

• Recent research: Ad revenue from reused Wikipedia articles; are Wikipedia researchers asking the right questions?
  And other new research publications.

• Essay: How
  A narrative to get you oriented to how this place works, and to the key policies and guidelines.

• Humour: Village pump
  More talk pages you don't want to miss.

• From the archives: An editorial board that includes you
  Four years - and nothing changed?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Signpost article

Dlthewave, Rather than have you find you indirectly, I wanted to let you know I have posted a Signpost comment in regards to your Firearms OpEd article. I have also posted a notice at Project Firearms talk. I'm concerned about what I view as a very one sided telling of events. Your article contains a number of accusatory claims but I think in most cases people would find the net results were not violations of DUE or NPOV etc. I think you have a very strong POV on the subject and thus you are making a good faith effort to fix a problem you are concerned about. However, I think many of the retelling are one sided and don't do the related discussions justice. We typically don't agree on these topics but I do think you are a good faith editor so I wanted to let you know I was responding to the article. If it's accepted I will likely, and as time allows, draft a rebuttal to many of the points and claims you made. I do think many of the claims can be reasonably refuted. Again, I do think you edit in good faith but I strongly disagree with the facts presented in your OpEd. Thanks. Springee (talk) 20:35, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

I prefer to discuss this on the Signpost submission page. If you feel that there are specific factual errors in my writing, feel free to raise your concerns there. –dlthewave ☎ 17:59, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Can we put together a village pump RfC together?

Dlthewave, I reverted two of your reversions of mine and thought I should try to discuss the topic with you. I think we have a disagreement regarding what constitutes WEIGHT when dealing with the mention of a crime in a gun article. I think your feeling is if the crime is significant and reports about the crime mention the gun then that establishes weight for inclusion in the gun article. My feeling is we need to show a RS about the gun that then links to the crimes. We have that with the AR-15 clones. There are plenty of articles that are about AR-15s that also talk about their use in crime and the debates associated with civilian ownership etc. Articles about guns like the Thompson sub-machine gun talk about their use in Chicago gang land violence. It's easy to find articles about the BAR that mention Bonnie and Clyde. However, I don't think we have any articles about the Sig Mosquito that suggest it's associated with any particular crime. What I would suggest is we work together to create a RfC so we could get wider input on this. It could actually help improve the Project:Firearms crime guidelines as it would then point to a RfC on the question. It would also give me a change to get input on the broader WEIGHT reciprocity question I've had for a while. Is this something you are interested in collaborating on? Thanks! Springee (talk) 13:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

You're certainly welcome to propose your "reciprocity of weight" idea to the community, and a Village Pump RfC would be a good way to do it. Hopefully you'll get more outside input than our similar NPOVN discussion did last year. If I can offer a piece of advice, I would suggest that you either write a proposal that applies neutrally to all Wikipedia content or be prepared to explain why criminal use of firearms should have separate, more stringent sourcing criteria. –dlthewave ☎ 17:17, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I'll run the proposal by you before posting. I don't believe that this would be a more stringent standard for firearms articles rather something that would generally hold true for all articles. The catch is when people ask for examples. Perhaps private airplane crashes would be a less political example? Thanks for the link to the previous discussion. I had forgotten about that one. Springee (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Springee: You've raised your WEIGHT idea with a few different editors lately and even mentioned your attempts to find common ground with me. At this point, I think it would be most helpful if we could have a concrete idea of what exactly it is that you're proposing. Would you be interested in writing something in your userspace, either as an essay detailing your viewpoint or as a specific guideline proposal, so that folks can provide feedback? This is something that would ultimately need to be decided at a community venue such as Village Pump, and some of it comes down to differences in opinion that might preclude a joint proposal, but I would be glad to look it over and provide my opinion or address any obvious flaws before you present it to the community. –dlthewave ☎ 20:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Request for help with STRING TRANSPORT page

Extended content The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Look I'm really sorry if I've posted this in the wrong place as it is not really a personal criticism or a baseless accusation but a request for your help with the changes I attempted to make to an article (which resulted in not only my changes being removed but many other changes which have occurred since today). Any advice would be appreciated. I didn't want to pollute your talk page with the content below but as you seem to really be concerned with the content of the String Transport system page, it helps me rest easier with the knowledge that at least someone else who was generally interested in the subject had read my concerns (and judged them accordingly). Is there anything in it that would be acceptable? Thanks on the beforehand and wishing you the best:

String Transport (also known as SkyWay, Yunitskiy String Transport and Rail Sky Way) refers to a theoretical engineering concept and proposals relating to a transportation system. Although these ideas may well relate to complex freight and passenger services, it has not received more than rudimentary practical application outside of the Russian Federation or Belorussia. When its business model has been proposed it has been widely questioned and never implemented.

The theory involves an ecofriendly system of public transport using prestressed rails with prestressed cables ("strings") and the concrete inside them. It is engineered for both freight and passenger services and has two main types of track structure and rolling stock.

Although there has been testing of this technology, the rudimentary construction in Moscow was considered unsafe and eventually taken apart and The Eco Techno Park facility in Maryina Gorka, Belarus,[1][2] has been blemished by technical faults and accidents. The websites of Skyway Capital refer to different proposals made to possible investors in places like the United Arab Emirates[3][4] but there is little chance that such projects will actually receive commercial realization.

Funding for this project has been implicated in a series of scandals related to financial irregularities and pyramid schemes in places where it has been presented as a complex business model including Lithuania and Belgium. Average people whose money would never be required for investment in international projects of this type are encouraged to invest in complex financial schemes[5] and types of crowdfunding.[6] Public warnings have been issued by the Bank of Lithuania and FSMA on the grounds that promoters attracting investments to SkyWay are not in compliance with their securities regulations.[7][8]

Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 18:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)Zaxander

@Zaxander: Thanks for reaching out, you are welcome to post here on my Talk page using the New Section button. The "submit a personal attack" link was my attempt at humor when I was subject to harassment by long-term sockpuppeteers and other abusers, giving them their own place to leave their accusations.

SkyWay raises a lot of red flags for me as well. The technology just doesn't seem practical or coherent, and the funding model is concerning. As a potential investor I would walk away from it. However, Wikipedia articles are built around reliable, independent secondary sources, and our personal analyses and friends' experiences aren't sufficient to label it as a scam. Wikipedia also doesn't debunk or expose things like this, we can only write what has already been said by the secondary sources. We have several official statements from banks and governments regarding the illicit marketing of securities but nobody seems to have done a thorough all-around assessment.

The "string" prestressed rail/cable technology itself has received practically zero coverage outside of Skyway's and Yunitskiy's own websites. It doesn't seem to be a notable concept at all. This means that our article should give little to no weight to it. I'm working to change the focus and name of the article to the company itself, since that's what the sources cover. –dlthewave ☎

@Dlthewave: We're in complete agreement about the role of the Wikipedia to document reliable secondary sources. The extremely worrying problem was that the 'string theory' article was doing the exact opposite for so long. To my credit I'm actually responsible for the changes that resulted in the inclusion of the reference to the FSMA article. Then today I was shocked to discover that not even the 'help update the problematic references' warning was present. So in desperation and not knowing any better how to respond I added a warning at the top of the page informing readers that 'STRING THEORY' was implicated in a financial scam. Fortunately the user DreamLinker promptly changed it back to how it was before the 'help reference' warning disappeared. And it was great to hear confirmed from you that Yunitsky is indeed one and the same thing as the SkyWay business venture. The company director, however, is called Kudryashov and scammers use this ambiguity - the idea of on the one hand a scientific theory and on the other the business investment - to muddy the waters and create confusion. It's genuinely hard to ascertain exactly how the scam works. It's so frightening how effective this is but I suppose it's actually unsurprising how good scammers are at scamming. The only way I could think of solving the problem was to explain this extremely worrying ambiguity. It was either that or create two articles, one on the 'science' and another on the real instances of scamming like the FSMA complaint I mentioned. But this would only have resulted in further opportunities for the scammers to abuse Wikipedia. I was getting really worried so I finally reached out to you (and other users like DreamLinker who seemed concerned) to help me. That was scary because it was very possible that any one of you was a 'sockpuppet' (a new word in my vocabulary as of this evening) or a scammer who'd just ban me from posting anything. I'm now so glad I did. And you have to admit that although Wikipedia shouldn't be there to point out scams, it should provide a safe source of information on the business if it is a documented instance of a scam because, well, people have the right to an objective description of the facts. Your solution is by far the best and hopefully with careful and considered wording potential enquiries will help people make the right choice about investing a lot of their money rather than confusing them. Thanks again for responding so quickly and wishing you the best Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 21:02, 16 February 2019 (UTC)Zaxander.

@Dlthewave: What are the chances of the article title change actually getting approved? I hope the title is changed and that someone will have the chance to reference the published articles on the danger of the financial scam. I probably should not be the one to do it although I'd be perfectly willing to try if no one else is willing to. I actually wrote the article on the 'minipiano'; it was a difficult process of paring back my verbose writing style and searching really hard for references. And there's another problem I'm going to need your help on. The user Kmarinas86 also responded to my pleading for assistance on dealing with the problematic science. They made me a detailed list of references made available by, you guessed it, Yunitsky. Most of them are by Yunitsky himself which probably renders them worthless and all are taken from his site. But I'm obviously not qualified to comment on the science, besides I can't really read Russian either, especially the scientific vocabulary. Most of the commercial stuff and the market studies seems to be flowery bullshit that has little value. If the name change, however, is not approved OR someone else posts a new article on String Transport, then someone's going to have to check the validity of any of this stuff. Also such an article - even if it is intended to document the science- would have to include perhaps not a warning but at least some information about the connection to the way the project has attempted to attain finances and how it has failed to actually get built anywhere, especially if as you suggested Skyway/SkyWay Capital is indeed Yunitsky inside and out. Do you think this is a valid fear? Take a look at this stuff and let me know what you think. Maybe it's all just bullshit and I've got nothing to worry about. Yellow articles are highlighted in yellow -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kmarinas86

@Dlthewave: I'm attempting to clean up the article and remove unverifiable references. For example, the following deletion references an article which redirects to the Skyway website and which doesn't actually show which document it's supposed to be. This is the text I removed: "Later, in 2017, the State Railways University in Moscow made another conclusion, which stated that “if the issues of rigidity, reliability, safety and maintainability are properly addressed, this technology can be implemented”, and also “the string rail transport technology is innovative and is of undoubted interest for science, engineering and experimental research." " Am I doing the right thing? Surely if this university really said what they claim, they'd be able to provide a more reliable reference?

@Dlthewave: Now I'm afraid that user Kmarinas86 is part of the scam. They spend a lot of time defending the way SkyWay finances itself on the talk page and the flowery language she/he uses reminds me of the attempts of scammers to obfuscate the issues. The caregories at the bottom of the page need to be edited too especially if they're going to change the name of the article as you've suggested. What do you think?Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 13:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)Zaxander

In my opinion your removals are justified since the content was not supported by independent sources. If it is reinstated by others, the burden is on them to establish verifiability, and we can challenge any unreliable or self-published sources at Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I have some experience in dealing with editors who violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and I will request a block, ban or warning from an administrator if necessary.

It's best to avoid casual discussions or accusations regarding Conflict of Interest. You may directly ask Kmarinas if they have a COI (best to do this at their talk page) or post at Conflict of Interest Noticeboard if you have solid evidence, but do not bring it up in the course of discussion. This can seriously derail the consensus-building process and breed bad blood between editors.

One piece of advice I would offer is to avoid using Talk pages to discuss whether or not this is a scam. We're not here to decide that, and talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article based on reliable sources. The list of sources presented by Kmarinas seems to be an attempt to convince you that the concept is supported by experts, but the burden is on them to add these sources to the article and prove that they are reliable. Happy editing –dlthewave ☎ 17:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: Oh god now I've gone and accused someone of being involved with a scam. I certainly wouldn't post such an accusation on their page but I suppose I should try not to be flippant about anything I say. Sorry for these intrusive postings but now there is a real problem. Ksmarina86 who's been updating the 'string theory' site is definitely not a disinterested party. He or she is either someone who's hoping to gain money from investments they've made by getting others to invest or knows people who are connected to the ... 'questionable financial management'. And he or she appears to be a recognized scientific contributor to Wikipedia. Here's something a Ksmarina86 posted to the MLM discussion thread I reference on the talk page: kmarinas86 Oct 23rd, 2017 at 5:57 am (Q) "No IPO, can’t sell the shares yet. No marketplace to sell them. Only buy. No price to sell at. It’s a long term investment... [edit here] ...Buy, hold, wait for profitability, then sell or hold to collect dividends when the marketplace for the shares is created a few years from now. Be greatful of the possibility of dividends. Most equities pay meager dividends if at all. Dividends are needed to provide shares with real value. 25% of earnings is quite significant for dividends. Decide for yourself if there is a market for high speed transport and if SkyWay proper will take enough market share to make the equity worth your investment. Always be on top of your financial decisions, and look for companies which have a Blue Ocean Strategy in mind and who openly communicate with the public." I don't know what to do about this as this user has changed the Wikipedia site before, he or she has changed it very recently and they'll do it again. Appreciate your advice. I've gone and got myself involved questioning people who could cause me real problems.Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 17:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)Zaxander

@Dlthewave: I need your advice on categories. There's nothing explicity wrong with the categories in the 'SkyWay' article as they stand presently. But the four categories that only refer to the unverifiable transportation technology is blatantly misleading. There are categories for 'Multi-level marketing' and 'Pyramid and Ponzi schemes' as well. We know from the verifiable references that both Yunitsky and all the companies associated with SkyWay use both of these techniques. It seems misleading to me to include a bunch of references to categories that suggest the validity of the transport system without including references to the marketing techniques which are also valid categories. Also, of the existing categories, what in the verifiable references suggests that SkyWay should be associated with 'Sustainable transport'. It seems to me to be relatively unsustainabl, hence it's inability to catch on anywhere. What do you think? Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 20:34, 17 February 2019 (UTC)Zaxander

@Dlthewave: The changes I made to the two dodgy paragraphs on the Lithuanian scandal were changed back. As the second paragraph didn't make much sense I removed it with the unverliable references. But seeing that it got changed by someone reliable and wanting to do justice to the 4 reliable soures, I read them all and even translated the one in Lithuanian. It's all so complicated you could make a motion picture out of it. I summarized the facts that I could ascertain on DreamLinker's user page. Hardly any of these facts were included in the original text. As such, someone should probably rewrite this section entirely based on this information but I'm now worried I'd make it too complex, and it's officially driven me around the bend. But before starting the readings and the summary I took the unnecessary information out again. Wishing you the best from Belgium. Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: Just a small note. For fun I went right back to the beginning and looked at the changes to the article as it developed. It's probably not all that surprising to discover that one of the early contributors was Yunitsky himself. It wouldn't surprise me that the user Kmarinas86 is actually a newer incarnation of the same person. They claim to be an English-only reader. I don't believe this. I'm familiar with Russian the basic syntax of the English is typical for Russian speakers. And I no longer feel so bad about the article being wrong for so long. It actually only became really long and pseudo-scientific a few years ago. Before that it was just a stub. Kind regards from Belgium, –Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 19:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: A new section was added on construction of sites in Moscow and the Belarus. I painstakingly checked the references which were basically maps, uploaded illustrations, contracts and self-promotion. The user who posted them was unsurprisingly Kmarinas86. I encouraged them to make succinct suggestions for changes with links to valid sources justifying their use in the talk page. I emphasized the fact that consensus among users was important. –Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 13:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: I find it a bit embarrassing that my worried posts have taken up comparably so much space on your talk page. Can you move it all to another page? Maybe you could creat one for 'indulgent rambling'. I'm really sorry for this. –Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

No need to apologize, I've collapsed the section so that it doesn't take up quite so much space. I think that you have a lot of insight into what's going on at Skyway and hopefully we can find sufficient sourcing to expand our coverage of their business dealings. –dlthewave ☎ 19:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar

Good show in the critical evaluation of the String theory site and the suggestion that it be changed to "SkyWay". The science is completely unsupported by valid sources. It really scares me that no one has acted upon this site despite complaints about it in its talk page for more than a decade. I know actual people who were misled by Wikipedia into thinking that 'string theory' was scientifically valid and therefore that the 'skyway' transportation system was a good way to invest their money. Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 19:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

This has got to be seen to be believed : https://www.swigaptraining.com/skyway-anatoly-yunitskiy-was-awarded-the-international-peace-prize-from-slovakia-via-skyway/ Just out of curiousity, I checked. No one apart from pages and pages of SkyWay propaganda mention the recent ceremony. In fact, as far as I can see no one else has received such a prize. So funny it's scary.–Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 20:30, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Please review WP:APPNOTE

I've removed your notice here [[1]]. I believe I understand why you feel this might have been CANVASING but I think you will find it was proper notification per the APPNOTE section. The material in question was discussed by four of us (you and I included) just a few months back. Waiting a period of time then starting a new conversation without considering the views previously raised might be FORUMSHOP issue. I don't know for certain but I'm sure it's not favorably viewed. Conversely, notifying all editors involved in a previous discussion of the same topic is appropriate notification; WP:APPNOTE "Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)". It would only be inappropriate if I notified previously uninvolved editors or was selective in my notifications. Springee (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

What previous discussions are you referring to? I am not aware of any that reached consensus, and my paragraph format was an attempt to address the "indiscriminate list" concerns. –dlthewave ☎ 22:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Springee, please strike the WP:FORUMSHOP accusation. I did not start any new discussions, in fact all of the recent discussions on the topic were started by you. –dlthewave ☎ 22:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I said might be forumshop but I wasn't sure. You are correct, you didn't initiate any of the discussions. However, we had a discussion here [[2]] to which you were a party. That discussion resulted in the removal of the section. You certainly can object to the removal but instead you simply restored it several months later with no discussion. I understand this was an honest oversight but the effect is similar. A consensus is reached then someone who at least should have been aware of the consensus as a party in the discussion acts against it with out additional discussion. I know we don't agree on much of this material but I also know you are a good faith editor. I'm only bringing this up because I think your warning on my page was incorrect per APPNOTE. Springee (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Firearms content

Dlthewave, you are removing a lot of basic content from a number of firearms articles and I was hoping to make a basic request. Some of the information looks like good removals but other material looks like material that shouldn't be controversial and likely could be sourced with minimal work. Take this removal for example [[3]]. It does read to much like promotional material. However, there are also interesting bits of content such as the operating mechanism. The fact that the frame of the firearm is actually a sub assembly that fits inside of a larger grip (thus allowing the gun to be changed from compact to full size without a new serial number). Even if the text reads in a promotional style (it should not) the content is not controversial and even the mfr's product page should be a sufficient source (for example we can cite Ford's HP claims for cars). I hope you would agree that the technical content, if properly sourced, improves the utility of the article. Rather than wholesale removal would you please tag so others change change things later? I know we don't often agree but I hope this is something we can agree on. Springee (talk) 19:25, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Looks like stripping down a lot of WP:UNDUE WP:FANCRUFT to me. Simonm223 (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

What is the boundary between fancruft and operational facts that readers might care about? I think this is one of the reasons why there are so many firearms disputes. Some editors want to see things like "has hammer decocker" etc. Other editors are interested in the crime material. That said, the operating specs etc aren't controversial and articles about the guns are likely to include such information just as articles about cars are likely to say what type of suspension, how many speed transmission etc. Springee (talk) 19:35, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Something doesn't have to be controversial to be a dull, pointless waste of bits useful only for hardcore fans. Having llooked at DLthewave's excellent edit linked from this page I'd say they were removing precisely that - a dull, pointless waste of bits useful only for hardcore fans of a pistol. And WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies here. As does WP:FANCRUFT rather directly. Simonm223 (talk) 19:38, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I understand the Project Firearms guidelines have been problematic with respect to criminal use but in reading over the style guide it seems very clear that things such as how the gun operates, features etc are generally of interest.[[4]] Consider the content in the FN P90 and FN Five-seven GA tagged articles. I think the difference isn't the content but simple that it needed to be sourced better. Springee (talk) 20:05, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

The firearms WikiProject is one that has been taken over by purveyors of fancruft. I don't see, "but the project page liked it" as a compelling argument in favour of inclusion of this level of pointless and irrelevant detail about how the gun functions. Simonm223 (talk) 20:22, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• Keep in mind that the Firearms style guide represents the opinion of a small group of editors and does not necessarily reflect the views of the wider editing community or even our core content policies. The project seems to prescribe certain different levels of inherent WP:WEIGHT or inclusion criteria to certain aspects such as caliber, features, criminal use, variants, official users, etc, but this is not how weight is determined. We don't include something just because it is "generally of interest". If these items are not covered, or if they are discussed in different proportions by reliable secondary sources, our articles should reflect that level of coverage.

The level of detail in FN P90 is debatable, but at least it has inline sources throughout. The unsourced content which I removed from P320 is retained in the edit history and editors are welcome to reinstate it if reliable secondary sources are provided and the community agrees that the level of detail is appropriate. –dlthewave ☎ 20:37, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• I'd like to share my experience from the WWII area, where I've removed much unsourced / POV content and trivia. This has in the past caused some consternation, see for example: Talk:Finnish Volunteer Battalion of the Waffen-SS#WP:3O & especially the comment starting with "I have reverted the edit in violation of BURDEN and am preserving the material by giving this link..."

What I learned from that is to save the diff to the Talk page; I add to my edit summary "Will preserve on Talk". That way, interested editors can retrieve the removed material from the diff provided and see if there are sources available. It's always a good idea to remember that WP:V applies across the entire encyclopedia. If there are no secondary sources that are independent of the subject, then the content may be unverifiable, undue, promotional, and / or excessive intricate detail that does not belong. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@K.e.coffman: Thanks for that suggestion, it seems like a good way to avoid misunderstandings. –dlthewave ☎ 19:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement warning

As a result of the recent arbitration enforcement request to which you were a party, I am warning you not to misuse Wikipedia as a forum for polemic statements unrelated to Wikipedia, or attacking or vilifying groups of editors, persons, or other entities. Should such problems reoccur, you may be made subject to blocks, topic bans or other discretionary sanctions. Sandstein 07:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm withdrawing this warning per my comment at AE. Sandstein 18:39, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

ARCA

Please note that I have opened a request for clarification from the arbitration committee that involves you. I would be grateful if you would give your views at WP:ARCA#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Clarification_request:_Gun_control. GoldenRing (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)