User talk:Arado Ar 196

Userboxes

vn-3This user talk page has been vandalized 3 times.

Arado Ar 196, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Arado Ar 196! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like MrClog (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Manoeuvre load factor in a spin

Thanks for taking an interest in our article Spin (aerodynamics). One of your changes added the maximum load factor specified in airworthiness design standards as normal acceleration in metres per second squared. The design standards only specify load factor as a multiple of g; never as a normal acceleration so I reverted your addition. Keep up the good work! Dolphin (t) 22:01, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 01:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Rocket page moves

Please do not make moves you claim are per WP:MOSCAPS to pages that are at the official, proper-noun designation. These weren't simple descriptions. Thanks - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I concur. Also, while you're welcome to disagree, it best that you propose the moves through the WP:RM discussion process. BilCat (talk) 03:01, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I apologise for all this moves. I agree that these weren't simple descriptions. It's pretty obvious. Now someone should explain this to our comrade @Primergrey: WP:RM exists for a reason and Manual of Style isn't justification for everything. Methinks it's not right for me to blame another editor, but it was his move of 5-Inch Forward Firing Aircraft Rocket to "5-inch forward firing aircraft rocket" that convinced me that same "rule" applies to other articles about rockets. Now I see that MOSCAPS is nothing in comparison with Common Name, common sense and actual names of article subjects. Thanks for reverting mine misdeeds. Arado Ar 196 (talk) 06:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

"Methinks it's not right for me to blame another editor...[but I will, anyhow]..." A couple of your moves were rightly reverted as they were weapon systems, the other reverts, and the revert of my move, were in error but, given the dearth of pageviews, it's nothing. Primergrey (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

"the other reverts, and the revert of my move, were in error [but I will not bother to prove that]". Can you prove that "5-Inch Forward Firing Aircraft Rocket" isn't official designation of that rocket and isn't its common name, but just the description? I guess it also counts as weapon system. Mine apologies for blaming you, but sometimes it's better to be honest and clearly explain the reason of your actions, than to be polite. I also hope that next time you won't move pages without discussion. Good luck at WP:RM! Arado Ar 196 (talk) 19:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Here's the thing; if an article could begin "The 5-Inch Forward Firirng Aircraft Rocket is a five-inch forward firing aircraft rocket...", which it could, then it is descriptive. Primergrey (talk) 21:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

You're pretty right that it's descriptive. This rocket was really rocket-propelled weapon, was fired forward and had the warhead with 127 mm diameter (5 inches in obsolete units). But descriptive designations was common for American military equipment of that era. There are a lot of examples, like "Heavy Tank M6" ("heavy" describes its weight, "tank" describes it as tracked armored fighting vehicle and only M6 designates it as "Model Sixth"). But such descriptive designations are still official designations, not descriptive names invented by pilots, soldiers, historians or someone else. Yes, they're very different from modern designations, like "Hydra 70" (agressive nickname+calibre) or "9M14 Malyutka" (GRAU index+cute nickname). But as designations they still need to be capitalised as in sources. Of course, this is the free encyclopaedia and you live in a free country, so you have your right to disagree. I shan't continue this discussion though, I'd rather go drink some tea and read some GL manga. Have a nice day, comrade! Arado Ar 196 (talk) 09:20, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Restored biased language?!?!?

Good day, sir(?),

You recently reverted an edit to a biased version on the article "Child discipline". The biased version (as of current) implies that all people see "Hot saucing" as abuse, when this is simply not true (and I can vouch for this). An edit was recently made that was infinitely more neutral, yet was reverted to the prior, biased version. Do you care to explain such a bizarre revert? Wikipedia's policies on neutrality can be found here. Cheers! Kehkou (talk) 15:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Well, I may be wrong, but when there's practice of inflicting pain and suffering to discipline somebody, we don't need over 9000 sources to call it 'torture' or 'abuse'. Currently, there are only two sources advocating for the practice in question: Lisa Whelchel with her book and some nuts from Today's Christian Woman magazine. So it's more like abuse with some advocates than "practice (sometimes seen as abusive)". But enough with that, your version is definitely more neutral than the one I reverted. Good job, buddy. Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 16:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Neutral information is important

The article is full of elements that could be called biased, incl. the fact it cites many people who have strong political opinions on the matter. Wikipedia should be about providing broad enough and factual take on all topics. It should be neutral.

I would challenge you to identify what was NOT neutral about my chapter? The chapter included the notion that "gender identity ideology" is being critized by MANY people, including feminists and top scholars. It is a fact. I also offered a link for my claim that top-level doctors critize the erasure of the word "womanhood".

Can you point out how the chapter should be modified instead of removed? I hope that it will be put back, because it is factual :)

Waiting for your answer 194.157.43.230 (talk) 09:45, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Well, you're talking about anti-gender movement article, right? You see, buddy, it's an article about a rather fringe right-wing movement, so nothing strange that it slightly biased against its subject, that's example of WP:GOODBIAS. Now, let's look at your edits to the article. Some say that weasels are very cute, but it was claimed by critics that WP:WEASEL words aren't really helpful for writing so called neutral article. Many editors say that claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed, though it was disproven by many scholars. Well, you also added a reference to back your addition, but what's it? It's opinion piece from political newspaper. Wow, good choice, that's exactly what you need to outweigh all that references stating that anti-gender movement is just conspiracy theory fueled by moral panic and foreign disinformation campaigns~

So no, your addition to lead section can't be put back even reworded, since it's clear case of POV pushing aimed to give some degree of legitimacy and weigh to movement claims and discredit its critics. Maybe you can add some of that "top scholars" to Central figures section. With names and sources, of course. If you disagree with me, you are free to bring your issue with article neutrality to talk page of that article or to WP:NPOVN, but I'm not sure that someone will agree with you. Good luck, buddy! Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 11:09, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

My edit

How did it violate NPOV? I elaborated further and added specifics as to what people mean when they say "epsteined" 100.36.40.94 (talk) 16:02, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Love letter

Jonathan Greenblatt is an open Jewish nationalist and if you revert my edit again I'm going to report you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B154:F67:B188:2D74:EB10:CEA (talk) 18:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I notice the andrology page doesn't have a picture of a penis with a catheter inserted

The issue is not censorship. 120.159.108.212 (talk) 23:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Then what's the problem you have with finding a picture of a penis with a catheter and adding it to andrology article? Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 05:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I even found on Commons useful category for you: commons:Category:Male genital procedures. Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 06:04, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Love letter #2

Why are you wrongfully reverting my edits? The opinions on that page I replaced with facts of what actually happened. You are spreading misinformation by suppressing my edits 2603:6080:F10E:EBB1:3D38:B85A:5580:15B2 (talk) 15:52, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Maybe because your "facts" are just neo-Confederate bullshit? Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 15:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

can you move article please

Hello

Please make move for me

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2A00:1FA0:44D2:460D:0:59:AFC7:E201

I can't myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1FA0:44D2:460D:0:59:AFC7:E201 (talk) 16:13, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done While technically I can do this, other editor expressed some doubt [1] about renaming, so move seems to be controversial. Controversial moves should be requested and discussed before, see WP:RM/CM for instructions. Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 17:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the ”russian disinformation”

Do you have source that Giorgia Meloni and Jaroslaw Kazynski are influenced by russian disinfo. Or is it far more likely that they are just catholic reactionaries. 109.240.29.132 (talk) 20:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I haven't. But you also have no source that Catholic (pseudo)religious reactionaries are completely not influenced by it. The article already have sources both about disinfo (like that one [2]) and about Vatican's role (like that [3]), you have sources saying that specific politicians are Catholic reactionaries. But we can't do source alchemy and make conclusion that Catholics aren't influenced at all.

It just like with Trumpists in the US: most of them are already far-right, but Mister Khuylo is pushing them righter and righter. Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 08:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Love letter #3

So you can use Kurdish propaganda but no Turkish

There is no Neo-Ottoman praise on the site, secondly, the site does not claim that the entire city is made up of Turks, it mentions the existence of many other ethnic groups such as Zazas and Kurds, even Assyrians and Armenians, but it is true that the majority of the province is Turkish.

if you are so anti-propaganda, delete the part based on separatist Kurdish propaganda that "the majority of the province is Kurdish" Burtigin (talk) 11:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Yare yare, so Encyclopaedia of Islam, cited in the lead of Adıyaman Province, is Kurdish propaganda. And papers by Bingol and Sakarya universities, cited in Adıyaman, too. Didn't know this, thanks~ Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 13:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

References

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 19:05, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

removing edits on banned user

Hi this may help explain my edit on Pakistan human rights article [[4]] it was added by a sock account and I am removing since they are banned. 167.98.197.17 (talk) 14:08, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, mobile diffs are pain to see on desktop. Secondly, added content looks valid and sourced to WP:RS AP News, so at first I didn't get what's the issue with it. But now, sorry for reverting you and thanks for vigilance./srs Sometimes I need to think more and leave jackboots at the door while editing./lh Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 14:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

A little request please

Sorry for creating new section firstly no problem for the above situation. The user banned called Koreanguateng also made this edit [5] It is still present and contains unverified opinion of a human rights lawyer the statement is unverified and no secondary or third party reference backs up such claims I tried to edit the article about Child Sexual Abuse and remove the banned users edits but I am unable to edit that one for some reason. Could you kindly removed his edit I have posted diff above. I appreciate it greatly if you can help and maybe give advice? 167.98.197.17 (talk) 14:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

You can't edit child sexual abuse, because it's semi-protected (for obvious reasons). You still can request edit at talk page, using Template:Edit semi-protected. Someone will review your request and make the edit. But I would rather not involve myself into this. Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 15:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

covertaction magazine

Covertaction Magazine

Can you move this for me ? I tried to move it before. 2A00:1FA0:499:6764:0:55:91CE:BF01 (talk) 05:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Association for Behavior Analysis International

Could you explain why you've reverted the last version of Association for Behavior Analysis International. I had put a lot of time and [explanation/consensus seeking in the talk page] and a user came and reverted them all; when trying to return it to my edits, it keeps getting undone. Please help PsyNtst (talk) 15:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hey, buddy, could you explain what are connections between you and that IP editor and between you and ABAI (and maybe JRC too). Your account was created on 11 August, when IP was blocked and your editing style is pretty similiar.  Looks like a duck to me Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 16:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Almost forgot to ask, @Bbb23, as the one who blocked 64.98.71.171, what do you think about that tovarish above? Duck or mallard? Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 20:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't know what a tovarish is, but I've indefinitely blocked PsyNtst for block evasion.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:18, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Anna Eskamani's wikipedia page

Hi,

I encourage you to review the recent history of Anna Eskamani's page and note how biased many of the sections are written. It's bad enough that wikipedia has been keeping a warning on the page that it may not be trustworthy information as a result.

I should also note that it is very extraordinary for a single state house representative to have such a lengthy wikipedia -- let alone one who has only served 2 terms. Considering how short other more tenured members of the FL's wikis are (such as Toby Overdorf, Nicholas Duran, or Tracie Davis), I find it hard to believe that this is due to the supposedly long list of legislation that the representative has championed, and likely more an attempt to subversively campaign to readers on through what they are led to believe is a neutral source. 131.226.37.68 (talk) 19:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

If you think that articles about other politicians from Florida are too short, than go and fix it. Improve 'em.

Also, length of articles depends on amount of coverage of subject in reliable sources. It's not the fault of Wikipedia that some people get more media attention that others. But when article about Democrat happens to be longer than about Republican, it's, of course, the result of secret plot of Liberal Fascists, hired directly by Joe Biden, hiding in US embassy in Italy and editing using military satellites. Zero doubts about that. a!rado (C✙T) 20:04, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough however you didn't address the point I made about Wikipedia putting warning on this that a representative's page is likely influenced by a close associate of hers and may not be neutral 131.226.37.68 (talk) 20:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Love letter #4

Russia is burning.

Between "hate speech" and death, I think I'd prefer the former. Ukrainians are dying every day, at the hands of the Russian military. Some Russians think it's unfair that they receive hate speech. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

My two first ideas for reply were:

• Some parody of your bullshit like "Palestinians/Cops are dying every day, but some Jews/African-Americans still get triggered by K-word/N-word"
• Explanation that it's bad to equate some ethnical, racial or social groups with actions of some members of those groups.

But screw this, idea #1 is too POINTy, idea #2 will fall on deaf ears, so I'll just invite you to go ahead and call me a "Russian asshole", like Jake in HM2. Maybe you can also beat me a bit with lead pipe? I wouldn't resist, I swear, just do it in a snake mask, for more kinks./lh BTW, good luck at appealing your future topic ban from ARBEE when you'll get it. a!rado (C✙T) 18:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

My job as a Wikipedian is to spread knowledge. It is my impression that a large proportion is unaware of the crimes that are being committed by the Russian military in Ukraine at the present moment. Would you like me to show you some photographs? Video tapes? Jargo Nautilus (talk) 18:38, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Look what they've done! [some antisemitic rant]! Wait, what you mean by "indeffed per NONAZIS"?!

Why would I? I'm fully aware of the heinous things that Khuylo's mercs are doing. And I still don't see carte blanche for hate speech in your hands. I wonder why?

Just accept that you're being mocked for being a bigot. If you don't think that calling entire ethnicity/nationality "orcs" is bigotry, I don't care. Don't post here anymore, you're unwelcome. a!rado (C✙T) 19:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Didn't read before hatting

Verbose response --> Attaching oneself to an ethnic/national identity is simultaneously a birth-right and a choice. You were born Russian, but you also choose to identify as Russian. Indeed, I see on your user page that you identify as a member of the human race. If that is true, then why are you so offended when bad things are said about Russia? Indeed, it is easy to tell the difference between a global citizen and a nationalist by the degree that they are offended by criticism of their home country. If you are offended by the implication that Russia is a bellicose state, then you must identify rather strongly with the Russian national identity. And that's completely on you. You don't have to identify as Russian. You can denounce the Russian identity, if you want. If you are a very patriotic Russian, you can even support the democratization movement in Russia and advocate for the removal of Vladimir Putin. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 19:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC) ^I am not opposed to "Russian people" as a whole (although some of my previous language may have been ambiguous on this point). I am opposed to the Russian Federation and everything that it stands for. I support a Free Russia that can participate in the global community on a respectable level. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 19:09, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive user

Hello Arado Ar 196, I hope everything is okay. I just wanted to let you know a disruptive user you have previously dealt and warned in the past and so has others for his disruptive editing: [6] I'm currently having problems with him and I have also warned him [7] but he decided to remove it and not listen. He falsely accused that I didn't cite any sources when you can clearly look through my revision that I have added more than three references and he decides to remove them all. I came to update the population estimation from 2014 to 2022 and added other references not involving the population. The guy didn't bother speaking to me on talk page or reviewing the references. He just wants to edit war and have everything his way. [8] Ayaltimo 06:29, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

hi

what commentary did i add Aspiringchemistyht (talk) 03:12, 8 October 2022 (UTC)