User talk:JackyTheChemosh: Difference between revisions
→October 2022: Reply Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit |
→October 2022: you are mistaken. |
||
Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
:You added the section to the article and have reverted my corrections to the incorrect labeling of the transgender rights movement as "the transgender movement". |
:You added the section to the article and have reverted my corrections to the incorrect labeling of the transgender rights movement as "the transgender movement". |
||
:This makes it appear like you're engaging in article ownership on top of adding POV statements [[User:JackyTheChemosh|JackyTheChemosh]] ([[User talk:JackyTheChemosh#top|talk]]) 21:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC) |
:This makes it appear like you're engaging in article ownership on top of adding POV statements [[User:JackyTheChemosh|JackyTheChemosh]] ([[User talk:JackyTheChemosh#top|talk]]) 21:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC) |
||
::You are incorrect. It's simple enough to look these things up. I don't know if you really don't know how to do this, or if you are pretending you don't know to be disruptive. Either way, I don't have the time to walk you through this. As all your edits to the article have been disruptive, you don't seem to be engaging in good faith here. - [[User:CorbieVreccan|<span style="color: #660099;"><strong>CorbieVreccan</strong></span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:CorbieVreccan|☊]]</sup> [[WP:SPIDER|☼]] 20:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:34, 9 October 2022
Welcome
|
Hi. Regarding this, I reverted because like I stated with a note, "This term is not simply used as a slur. It is, for example, used as a neutral descriptor in pornography. Criticism and controversy concerning the term are addressed in the second paragraph of the lead and lower in the article. As seen in that paragraph and lower in the article, some in the transgender community disagree with objection to its use." If you reply to me on this, please reply here on your talk page instead of at mine. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:04, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Hey, I just reverted your edit at a redirect page. Just to let you know, the '#' is required for the redirect to keep working. Happy Editing! Signed, I Am Chaos (talk) 05:14, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- yeah sorry. i went a bit braindead. JackyTheChemosh (talk) 16:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
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 Eastern Europe or the Balkans. 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.
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.
~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
October 2022
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Fred Sargeant . Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.[1][2][3]
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You've been reverted twice by admins for changing the sourced content to call the BLP subject a TERF, which is loaded language and not in the sources. The sources describe his views as gender critical, which is linked to a different place on WP. Stop changing this because you prefer to label him otherwise. You do are now edit-warring to insert POV language on a BLP. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 17:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC) -
- @CorbieVreccan correct me if i am wrong but only you and a BoN and to my knowledge neither of you are administrators.
- Trans-exclusionary radical feminist is very much not a loaded label and is used academically. Gender critical is loaded as well as POV as it is exclusively used by people sympathetic to their views.
- Unless we're quoting an article we are not required to use the same wording as it. The sources are also not neutral on the person making restricting ourselves to their wording even more inappropriate.
- You added the section to the article and have reverted my corrections to the incorrect labeling of the transgender rights movement as "the transgender movement".
- This makes it appear like you're engaging in article ownership on top of adding POV statements JackyTheChemosh (talk) 21:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- You are incorrect. It's simple enough to look these things up. I don't know if you really don't know how to do this, or if you are pretending you don't know to be disruptive. Either way, I don't have the time to walk you through this. As all your edits to the article have been disruptive, you don't seem to be engaging in good faith here. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 20:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)