User talk:BasedMises/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with BasedMises. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This is an archive of User Talk:Based Mises. Please keep in mind that this is simply a record of the changes in the talk page of BasedMises.

BasedMises_{Mont Pelerin} 16:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Hi BasedMises! 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 78.26 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Rick Peterson (Politician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 18:58, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rick Peterson (politician) 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/Rick Peterson (politician) 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.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:59, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks Mcmatter BasedMises (talk) 01:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Localrussan -- Localrussan (talk) 15:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply

The article Warsaw radio mast you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Warsaw radio mast for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Localrussan -- Localrussan (talk) 23:01, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There was a recent sockpuppetry investigation that you were involved in. I have closed it without action, but I would like to ask you to note my comment here. Thanks and best, Blablubbs|talk 15:54, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Friedrich Hayek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conservative movement.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 02:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Please put your actual user name in your signature. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I have also blocked you from the Mises article and its talk page for three months. Please use that period wisely, to learn how to edit and to communicate. Drmies (talk) 02:36, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is reasonable. I already understand the basic manners you seem to hold as being above me and treating it as a false premonition; however, do keep in mind, I got extremely heated because I had already been doing this for 1-2 months now, trying to revert vandalism. 3 months is reasonable, although the "ban" on editing the entirety of Wikipedia is extremely short-sighted and naive. Could you also provide some insight on what to do in an edit war like this (I'm not exactly sure)
    • Yes. Walk away. I saw you had been doing this for a while and was on the verge of blocking you indefinitely. Walk away, ask for protection, ask for other editors to get involved, warn the other editor, bring them up on a noticeboard, report them at [{WP:ANEW]], any of those things--but you didn't, and now we have a hundred edits in this edit war clogging up the history. Good think you have other interests on Wikipedia: your opponent is blocked indefinitely, so I guess that ends the edit war, haha.

      If you browse around and look into these options I have summarized for you, you might indicate in an unblock request that next time you will know better what to do, and you might get unblocked. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looking back at it, I should've kept my cool for much longer.

For the unblock request, I honestly don't care that much about editing Mises's page, because it was mainly about reverting the 1-2 months' worth of edits.

Next time probably be less angry and after 3-4 minutes of back and forth reverts I'll probably use the noticeboard you added. Thanks! (also, for signatures, does it have to be your username or is it just a thing that's followed? Can't find anything explicit) F. A. Hayek 03:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

WP:CUSTOMSIG/P, A customised signature should make it easy to identify your username. What constitutes easy identification is probably open for at least some interpretation, but I'd recommend you just stick to "BasedMises" in the signature – it's far less confusing for others. -- Blablubbs|talk 09:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Fixed your talk page archiving

Hi! I took the liberty of fixing the auto-archiving settings at the top of this page. --rchard2scout (talk) 06:48, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! M. Friedman^{Mont Pelerin Society} 14:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Permanent income hypothesis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Character.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent Income Hypothesis: Good Improvement

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		Good job improving the article on the Permanent Income Hypothesis Osaofwefj (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

Thanks! M. Friedman^{Mont Pelerin Society} 19:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CNN controversies

Per

the bold, revert, discuss cycle, your bold edit has been reverted and objected to, and it is incumbent upon you to gain consensus for your proposed change to the CNN controversies article. The longstanding version has implicit consensus. I note that describing something as a "crime" which no reliable source describes as a crime, and which resulted in neither charges nor a conviction, may violate several Wikipedia policies. You must open a thread at Talk:CNN controversies, propose your changes, provide reliable sources to support them, and gain consensus for them. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Okay. Thanks for letting me know. However, I don't believe in whitewashing doxxing. BasedMises^{Mont Pelerin Society} 02:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well,

would require a clear and unambiguous consensus of reliable sources. If such sources exist, you're welcome to present them on the talk page. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I would have to disagree in the same way that the legal definition of murder is murder. Thus CNN performed blackmail. I don't exactly like or dislike CNN, but it is fairly idiotic to presume that they did not blackmail the person. I also dislike the branding of it as "right-wing". Anyways, this is pointless. Next time I will make more reasonable changes and get a consensus on the talk page first. BasedMises^{Mont Pelerin Society} 02:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We also can't describe something as a murder unless there was a conviction for murder. See, for example,

Shooting of Trayvon Martin or Nicole Brown Simpson. While many people believe Trayvon Martin was murdered, the person who shot and killed Martin was acquitted at trial - therefore, we cannot label his death a murder, or his killer a murderer. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Again, I do not want to get into a debate. Next time, I'll obtain consensus on the talk page. I certainly understand your concerns, especially because those who complain about CNN excessively tend to be vandals/etc. BasedMisesMont Pelerin Society 02:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Prager Academical Institution" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Prager Academical Institution. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 12#Prager Academical Institution until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. –dlthewave ☎ 12:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grover Furr is a maoist

Grover Furr is a maoist ok

not necessarily. He has written quite extensively on the Soviet Union, not The PRC. BasedMises^{Mont Pelerin Society} 03:39, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

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.

NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement imminent

If you do not cease making unsupported claims of fact about a living person, to wit, Grover Furr, I will file an Arbitration Enforcement request asking that you be topic-banned from his biography and any related subjects. No matter what we think of someone, they are entitled to fair treatment on Wikipedia. If you cannot find sources which support your additions, they cannot be made, period, end of sentence. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 23:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my opinion. It is a fact. I will refrain from editing, as long as Wikipedia does not kowtow to the whitewashing of pseudo"history" that you are pushing. Thank you for the message. I will keep that in mind while filing my report. BasedMises^{Mont Pelerin Society} 23:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Warsaw radio mast

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 21:00, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Use of Daily Mail and Sputnik as sources

Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Thank you. Egsan Bacon (talk) 00:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Okay. I did provide other sources, but I will remove Sputik and the Daily Mail. Thank you for the message! BasedMises_{Mont Pelerin} 00:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Warsaw radio mast

The article

good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Warsaw radio mast for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 16:20, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to

review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages

.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

– bradv🍁 05:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Permanent income hypothesis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berkeley.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Warsaw radio mast

The article Warsaw radio mast you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Warsaw radio mast for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 19:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Chitester moved to draftspace

An article you recently created,

general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:44, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

June 2021

talk) 22:33, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I didn't think it would turn into a dispute, because he isn't an economist (eg. take this piece by the Krug https://slate.com/business/1996/10/economic-culture-wars.html) BasedMises_{Mont Pelerin} 22:44, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Robert Reich 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a 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

talk) 22:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Your GA nomination of Permanent income hypothesis

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Card Carrying Parrot -- Card Carrying Parrot (talk) 00:40, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Your GA nomination of Permanent income hypothesis

The article Permanent income hypothesis you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Permanent income hypothesis for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Card Carrying Parrot -- Card Carrying Parrot (talk) 23:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Friedrich Hayek

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FeydHuxtable -- FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Your GA nomination of Friedrich Hayek

The article Friedrich Hayek you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Friedrich Hayek for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FeydHuxtable -- FeydHuxtable (talk) 16:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK nomination of Permanent income hypothesis

Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BuySomeApples (talk) 00:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

New message from Narutolovehinata5

Hello, BasedMises. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Permanent income hypothesis.
Message added 02:44, 16 August 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:44, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK nomination of Permanent income hypothesis has been marked for closure, and could close at any time unless you return before it does and address the issues that have been raised. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:44, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bob Chitester

request

that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

talk) 06:01, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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 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 NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply ]