User talk:ModernDaySlavery

Hello, ModernDaySlavery, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
Check out some of these pages:
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Introduction to Wikipedia
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 03:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I edit some particular pages?

Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.

Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?

Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.

How do I create an article?

See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.

How do I create citations?

Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:

==References==
{{Reflist}}

What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?

A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, ModernDaySlavery. Thank you for your work on List of pseudoscientific diet advocates. User:Voorts, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Please remember to tag redirect pages that you create with appropriate templates per WP:REDCAT.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Voorts}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

voorts (talk/contributions) 15:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Provable fairness for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Provable fairness is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Provable fairness until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

MarioGom (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Superseded theories in science

Please revert your changes to Superseded theories in science. Renaming an article solely to include a single item which is based on an unreliable source isn't constructive. The Stack Exchange sites, including MathOverflow, are user-generated content that should not be used as sources for Wikipedia articles (see its entry at WP:RSPS). Thank you. Schazjmd (talk) 14:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New message to ModernDaySlavery

I've undone many of your page moves, as they were done without any discussion and no grounding in site policy. Please peruse WP:NC for our core policy on how we use terms in article titles and the like. I would also recommend you start move requests instead of making the moves yourself if you're not really sure about them.

Also, I think you should consider changing your username, as it potentially violates our username policy. Thanks. Remsense ‥ 论 02:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop spamming

Please stop flooding the edit feed with purposeless edits. Thanks. – 2804:F1...F9:DD00 (talk) 03:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 03:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it.

The *Show preview* button is right next to the *Publish changes* button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 20:38, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed moves

You need to stop making undiscussed moves without any clear explanation. Please start making move requests going forward instead. Thanks. Remsense ‥ 论 05:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ModernDaySlavery- Adding to this as you just logged two requests at WP:RMTR ([2], [3]).

This also does not mean you should re-list the very same articles you tried to move yourself such as Face (sociological concept) at WP:RM/TR - if these moves are potentially controversial (which someone reverting them indicates), then they should go through a full formal WP:RM#CM requested move discussion for contentious moves. Especially so when another user has told you explicitly that the move was not good. Raladic (talk) 00:23, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ModernDaySlavery you've done it again with Distance education—and no, listing it as a technical move and then just doing it anyway when no one immediately swats you down or does it for you is not a discussion. Your consistently poor article title choices show that you do not know what you are doing, and you should not be moving pages unilaterally. The next time you make an undiscussed move like this, I am going to report you to ANI. Remsense ‥ 论 14:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ModernDaySlavery, your undiscussed move of List of earthquakes in California has now been reverted. The AN/I notice below is about that in particular and your undiscussed moves in general. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:48, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source as you did here [4]. You can learn which sources Wikipedia considers reliable at WP:Reliable sources and find out how to add the sources at Help:Referencing for beginners. And don't add content that is sourced to something that doesn't mention or support the content, as you did here. [5], [6] Thank you. _signed,Willondon (talk) 13:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Dawnseeker2000 19:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ModernDaySlavery,

Part of being an editor on Wikipedia is communicating with your fellow editors when questions arise about your editing decisions. Please respond to editors on your User talk page or, in this case, come to WP:ANI and respond to questions there. If you have questions about editing on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:45, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! ModernDaySlavery, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:45, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Blackpill" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Blackpill has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 22 § Blackpill until a consensus is reached. silviaASH (inquire within) 22:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

—Sangdeboeuf (talk) 02:15, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Incel. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 02:16, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Incel, you may be blocked from editing.

None of the sources you added support the idea of "hardmaxxing". Wikipedia is not a repository of obscure incel jargon. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 13:21, 14 August 2025 (UTC) Please refrain from making edits generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Incel. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox.[reply]

I can only assume that you used an LLM for your recent edits, since if you have actually read the sources you would have seen that the Guardian and France24 articles didn't even mention the "black pill". Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 13:40, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your assumptions are wrong as always. Also "success is entirely determined by genetics" here according to RS "mostly" is more appropriate than "entirely", otherwise it is an exaggeration. Please bring a third neutral opinion. ModernDaySlavery (talk) 16:00, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources in the article (including several added by you) say otherwise. If you didn't use an LLM for your "hardmaxxing" claim then it was evidently original research, since none of the sources support your claim. That's actually worse. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:42, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Logic, Science etc.

The next time you ignore other editors' direct requests, or citing any sources to speak of, or just the general expectation that discussions happen on talk and consensus is established—and go on instead to try another round of slow-motion edit warring, seemingly hoping you can finally slip what you want under the radar without even bothering to explain why, I really think I have to go to WP:ANI about it. I don't know what here I haven't tried to tell you multiple times for going on a year now, and you have been a brick wall. Remsense 🌈 论 06:54, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if it's what it looks like in Logic's contribution history and you just casually continued doing the exact same brick-wall edit warring logged out, as if that would fool anyone—that is not exonerating evidence in such a situation. The other possibility—that "reconciliation" looks like collaborating with unaffiliated edit warring IPs to put back an edit you clearly also want against consensus—that is almost as bad as sockpuppeting IMO. I really recommend you take the time now and go over why WP:Consensus is important, I don't know. Remsense 🌈 论 06:59, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.Remsense 🌈 论 18:52, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ModernDaySlavery I let my guard down until your last obvious VPN-hop! What a blunder. Remsense 🌈 论 21:40, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Red pill and blue pill, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article.

Your source did not use the term "hardmaxxing" (or "hardmaxxer") at all. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:06, 1 September 2025 (UTC) Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Red pill and blue pill, you may be blocked from editing.[reply]

A Wikipedia article is not a reliable source. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Blackpill while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:35, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Uni3993 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Uni3993. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you believe that 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 15:31, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]