User talk:David A

derailment

Thank you for remvoving it, I was about to tell you it was not the right venue to fight that fight. Slatersteven (talk) 17:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

No problem. As a very antitotalitarian genuine far leftist, it is very frustrating and depressing to me how the totalitarian far right capitalist oligarchs have bought up, or made themselves financially indispensable to, almost all underfinanced western news media, so virtually all reporters, who technically tend to be leftleaning themselves on a personal level, are nevertheless forced to never properly investigate all of the evils that our corporate overlords and their enforcers perform, and rather have to help them play hatemongering divide and conquer with the poor and powerless working class, instead of having them unite and focus on their true enemies, the billionaires in charge and their bought and paid for politicians. David A (talk) 17:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Maybe, but this is not a forum. Slatersteven (talk) 17:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Sorry about that. I have a very stream of consciousness way of communication. David A (talk) 18:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

So do I its why I am very strict with how I communicate here. Slatersteven (talk) 18:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay. I will have to try harder then, but I am not very competent socially. David A (talk) 19:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Then please read wp:soap and wp:forum. Slatersteven (talk) 16:07, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay. I will do so. 🙏 David A (talk) 16:32, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

That leaves this, which is so problematic that I think a Contentious Topic notification is in order. Wait--I see ToBeFree already supplied one. Please stay out of trouble in such areas: an editing restriction is easily made but the paperwork is cumbersome. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. In an ideal world, contentious topic notifications don't depend on problematic-ness. :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, to be fair, I reverted my response, but I can remove the edit you cited as well, if that is preferable.

Where is the contentious topic notification? David A (talk) 21:05, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Never mind. It seems to have been submitted above a few years ago. David A (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Anyway, I will try to focus on helping to improve on entertainment pages instead, and have removed the politically related ones from my watchlist, as I have limited mental filters to prevent me from saying exactly what I think all the time. David A (talk) 21:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

About the She-Hulk page

We're very sorry for editing those abilities like that. We thought we put in the right powers this time, but it turns out that we were really wrong. Please forgive us and we'll never ever do it again in the future. 2600:1700:B030:EC0:49A3:C7B8:C051:B884 (talk) 23:54, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

No problem, and thank you for your apology, but I would greatly appreciate if you stop messing things up there any further. 🙏🙂💖 David A (talk) 07:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

pro-fascist ideology of Bleach

Interesting. Might be worth mentioning in the article. Reminds me of a similar criticism of Legend of Galactic Heroes (although I diagree with that). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, it is due to the nature of the protagonist-centered morality of the supposed "good guys" of the Bleach story, particularly Mayuri, as well as the type of government they are fighting for, but in lack of very good sources of published criticism of the work in question, I do not think that it would be appropriate of me to cause potential controversy. David A (talk) 15:57, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Some friendly advice on RFK Jr. editing

Speaking as someone who almost exclusively edits political and civics-related articles, I know how tough it can be to separate your own personal beliefs from the topics you're editing. As seen on the campaign talk page, it looks like you might be struggling with that delicate balance as well. When I run into these situations myself, I find it helpful to:

1. Take a few deep breaths
2. Focus on editing other, unrelated topics
3. Take a wiki-break, if need be
4. Remember that this website isn't real life, just an encyclopedia.

Anyway, just thought I'd offer a few tips that you might find helpful.

All the best! Woko Sapien (talk) 21:49, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern. It is very appreciated. David A (talk) 06:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Using comic books to overrule secondary sources. Thank you. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Contentious Topics Notification: Arab-Israeli Conflict

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

In summary, can you explain how I should modify my behaviour please? David A (talk) 06:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

As the standard WP:CTOP notice notes above, the message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you for your help. David A (talk) 04:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited United States support for Israel in the Israel–Hamas war, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gallup. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Poll

Please see this diff. Seems like stalking by the same editor to remove this image. --Timeshifter (talk) 21:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Agreed. I will restore it. David A (talk) 03:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

They also seemed to remove a reference here, but it is best if you verify. David A (talk) 04:03, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the the help. As for the Druze article that is beyond my knowledge and pay grade. :)

Lately, I have been concentrating on maps, charts, and tables. I have limited time, energy, and health. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

No problem, and I am sorry to hear that. I would recommend regular crosstrainer or swimming exercise combined with good nutritional supplements, such as multivitamins, EPA and DHA fish oil or algae oil, and balanced mixtures of probiotics stomach bacteria for improved health. Thorne Multi 50+ is a very good multivitamin, for example. You can ask ChatGPT4 for suggested nutritional supplements customised for your specific needs as well. David A (talk) 20:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ideas. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

No problem at all. David A (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Details

It's worthy of investigation, but I'm not sure there is enough evidence to justify a checkuser and I'm unconvinced they are the same person. It may be tag teaming and it seems not much can be done about that. Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay. No problem. Thank you for helping out. I am more concerned about the possibility that they may work together for an official government agency of some kind. David A (talk) 11:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit warring in a contentious topic

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a is a designated contentious topic.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2024 pro-Palestinian protests on university campuses. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

• This edit [1] was previously removed by ABHammad [2] on May 20.
• This edit [3] was partially removed @O.maximov [4] on May 19.

* Protests of 1968 was otherwise removed by @Kire1975 [5] on May 19.

Personally I think MOS:NOTSEEAGAIN is a valid reason, as both the links you are restoring are featured in the overview section. Either way, please take it to the talk page before restoring such information, as you are restoring links that three other users have removed. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 12:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Now @האופה has reverted you on May 20 for reference sake. [6]. As a reminder, contentious topics have a WP:1RR rule in place. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 13:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay. My apologies then. I just thought that this information made sense to include and was removed without any explanation. David A (talk) 14:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I have mentioned in in the talk section of the relevant page now: [7] David A (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@CommunityNotesContributor- None of this is edit-warring. Please remove my @ and this diff from this conversation. Thank you. Kire1975 (talk) 03:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I've striked reference to your diff, as is only contextual anyway. Breaching WP:1RR within 24 hours, in a contentious topic, is definitely edit warring though. There are no ifs or buts about it. Better to warn a user than see them blocked in my opinion. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 11:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I see I was confused. If you included this diff instead of or in addition to the edit I made, then I might have seen the edit warring. Kire1975 (talk) 19:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

That was included above as ref 3. You're was added as context that the link was removed previously. It wasn't very clear of me I admit, probably only clear for the user in question. CommunityNotesContributor (talk) 20:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Attacking a national population

Hey David, your comment at the RM for Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza, which reads Also, 68% of Israelis support blocking all humanitarian aid to the Palestinian civilians under any circumstances, despite very well-documented ongoing starvation, and 94% believe that the Israeli military are using appropriate or not enough force, so the editors here are not the people who seem to have comparative empathy problems., is, besides violating NOTAFORUM, offensive. Talking about a national population having "empathy problems" is inappropriate—just as we wouldn't start listing stats about Turkish public opinion to assert a Turkish "empathy problem" to an editor we perceive as favoring Turkey (or criticizing a perceived anti-Turkish bias on WP), we should never be derailing editorial discussions about Israel with irrelevant accusations like that.

This can all be handled by just not making FORUMy comments, but especially: please don't ever make comments about the negative moral character of a nation's people. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, I was just matter of fact citing (with reliable linked sources embedded) what that nation's population was stating outright itself in statistical surveys by institutions within the country, after being repeatedly severely insulted by extremely partisan rants, including by the member I was responding to, who among other things claimed an extreme lack of empathy from me and other Wikipedia editors, and I still used the non-definitive word "seem", and the comparatively mild "empathy problem" term, so it was not a definitive judgement, and it should be noted that 32% of the Israeli responders did not support starving over 2 million people to death and that 6% did not support dropping the sum total equivalent of around 5 nuclear weapons on mostly civilian women and children, and that most of them are likely not well-informed regarding the full scope of the situation due to systematic news filter bubbles, but given such very extreme official statistics, and given all of the atrocities described in several of the Wikipedia pages regarding this ongoing situation, what would you want me to say in response really?

I am a humanist, not remotely a bigot. I believe in kindness, empathy, unity, and conscience, and that the vast majority of extremely ruthless sentiments in humanity are indoctrinated, including in this case, not that there are almost any inherent differences between the people of different countries. We are all almost entirely genetically identical after all. And I also expressed myself mildly, with a fact-based foundation, to point a logical hole in a hostile argument, in response to much more extreme attacks, and I received a (considerably milder than previously) "useful idiot" insult in response. However, you are correct regarding the "not a forum" point, so I likely shouldn't have responded at all. David A (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Your comment's gentleness compared to the forum comments that preceded it doesn't really matter—and by all means, be a humanist and believe in your conception of the origins of ruthless sentiment, but citing public opinion polls to assert a national population to have a comparative problem of character or morality is inappropriate. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 06:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, I only stated that the people who outright stated themselves that they have extremely ruthless sentiments seem to have empathy problems. Not that the people who responded otherwise do, and it isn't because they are Israelis. The same goes for any humans anywhere who support massacring civilian children. Again, what am I supposed to say regarding such ridiculously extreme sentiments? David A (talk) 06:37, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

You spoke about a proportion of a national population. If it were only about those who state support for some ruthlessness within the war, then you should* talk about those who support that ruthlessness, and the proportion within a specific nation should not matter. "91% of Turks deny the Armenian genocide—there's a lack of empathy" is a statement about Turks, not about Armenian genocide deniers. That would be "Some people deny the Armenian genocide; that's a moral deficit".

*I mean, you shouldn't talk about any of this. It's irrelevant. I'm just addressing the content of what you said because it's particularly offensive outside of being unsuited for Wikipedia. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 06:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay. It seems like I used poor wording then, but it is hard to always express oneself in an absolutely accurately nuanced manner that cannot be misunderstood. David A (talk) 06:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

But I will try my best to be as neutral and matter-of-fact rational in my tone as possible in the future. David A (talk) 06:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Bare URL references

Hello, and thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia, and in particular for adding references, as you did to Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza! However, adding a bare URL is not ideal, and exposes the reference to link rot. It is preferable to use proper citation templates when citing sources, including details such as title, author, date, and any other information necessary for a bibliographic citation. Here's an example of a full citation using the {{cite web}} template to cite a web page:

Lorem ipsum<ref>{{cite web |title=Download the Scanning Software - Windows and Mac |publisher=Canon Inc |work=Ask a Question |date=2022 |url=https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART174839 |access-date=2022-04-02}}</ref> dolor sit amet.

which displays inline in the running text of the article as:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

and displays under References as:

1. ^ Download the Scanning Software - Windows and Mac". Ask a Question. Canon Inc. 2022. Retrieved 2022-04-02.

If you've already added one or more bare URLs to an article, there are tools available to expand them into full citations; try the reFill tool, which can resolve some bare references semi-automatically. Additionally, even though something like English Wikipedia (markup [https://en.wikipedia.org English Wikipedia]) may not appear to be a bare URL, especially compared to https://en.wikipedia.org (markup https://en.wikipedia.org), both are equally susceptible to link rot, which is why using {{cite [media]}} templates is preferable. Thanks, and happy referencing! – Daℤyzzos (✉️ • 📤) 21:24, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the information. For some reason I seem to have had a hard time remembering the proper structure, but this section is useful for reminding me. David A (talk) 03:10, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! – Daℤyzzos (✉️ • 📤) 20:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brookings.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

I have corrected it now. David A (talk) 06:55, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Edit war warning

Your recent editing history at 2024 United States presidential election shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially as the page in question is currently under restrictions from the Arbitration Committee, if you violate the one-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than one revert on a single page with active Arbitration Committee restrictions within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the one-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the one-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Prcc27 (talk) 07:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I only reverted a single time because the talk page discussion had not finished yet. David A (talk) 11:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I have undone my revert now, but hope that you are willing to reconsider. Thank you. David A (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 11:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I usually do not have anything interesting to say, but I suppose that I can try to remember to clarify what I am doing. David A (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be interesting, just accurate :) It's also a great place to put why you made the change that you did, perhaps with a link to a relevant MOS section, policy or guideline, etc. It really does help a lot. Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 14:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I am terrible at memorising guidelines and the short links for them though, but I can provide brief explanations when they seem relevant at least. David A (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Honestly most of the time (with a few exceptions for the bigger ones) I don't have them memorized either, I just search for the shortcut when I'm writing my edit summary, but even if you don't want to do that, like the message says, something is better than nothing. You don't need to know the exact name of the policy/guideline but it's good to provide some kind of reasoning for your edit (especially with contentious topics, where there's a higher risk of conflict over edits). Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 19:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I will try to keep it in mind. David A (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion moved

Just wanted to make sure you're aware that the discussion you participated in at Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation § Estimate of future deaths was moved to Talk:Israel–Hamas war § Indirect casualties from the Lancet study. Kinsio (talk ★ contribs ★ rights) 02:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. David A (talk) 04:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Gaza war fatalities info box re talk

Hi David, I wanted to provide some information with regards to your open questions recently in the talk about the Lancet correspondence. I don't have extended confirmation yet so I can't comment there but because you posed an information request I wanted to respond directly. First, the correspondence in question is quite concise and might be faster for you to read than sorting through comments and deciding what to believe. Second, the estimate is a projection of eventual total deaths from all causes based on the current recorded mortalities, based on the fact that all-cause mortalities tend to be several times higher than recorded trauma-related mortalities in other wars. The sources cited are not very complete but it doesn't really matter as it's plausible and not our job to evaluate research claims. However, it is called "illustrative" in the author's tweet because usually statistical estimates would use data proximal to the situation in Gaza, and WFP surveys for example estimate all cause-war-related mortality SO FAR to be close to the Gaza MoH estimate of trauma related fatalities. However they could easily rise in coming months. My understanding though is the articles main purpose is to argue (1) gaza MoH data are relatively good, and (2) deaths will likely end up much higher than whatever they record, even if the war stopped tomorrow, from non-trauma causes. I think however you choose to cite it, (1) it should be clear it's not an estimate based on Gaza specific data beyond the 40,000 recorded lost, and includes estimated future deaths, and (2) I really object to citing it as "lancet correspondence." The authors' names should be cited. The fact that lancet editors decided to publish a correspondence means they thought it should be reasonable to enter public discourse, but the research claim should clearly be quoted to the authors. Correct me if I'm wrong but I can't find any other wikipedia mortality estimate that was cited from the journal rather than the authors. Scienceturtle1 (talk) 07:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you very much for the information. David A (talk) 08:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)