User talk:Fa suisse

Hello, Fa suisse, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 22:48, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply ] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Featured content Miscellaneous Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page

]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Fa suisse, 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! — Newslinger talk 10:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

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) 09:29, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on WikiIndex 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 web content 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. Largoplazo (talk) 00:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article WikiIndex 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/WikiIndex 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. Largoplazo (talk) 08:00, 31 May 2019 (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) 14:16, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fa suisse. It has been over six months since you last edited the

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:35, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Populist leaders, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fa suisse,

Thank you for creating Jan-Werner Müller.

It's less that the external links don't follow policy and more that the External links section needs its format fixed.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 04:53, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect WikiIndex. Since you had some involvement with the WikiIndex redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Black (human racial classification), which you created, has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:34, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fa Suisse. Can you please add some context to your addition here? Who is Jesse Lile? What's his area of expertise? Tell us readers why his opinion is important (i.e. he's a sociologist or enthnologist economist or whatever). MeegsC (talk) 14:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing my attention to this, MeegsC; I would likely have missed your remark on the talk page. I have just added some background regarding Jesse Lile, Kelefa Sanneh and Helen Pluckrose. Fa suisse (talk) 00:01, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Violence and controversies during the George Floyd protests, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AFP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments. El_C 10:13, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are obviously referring to [1]. I removed the section precisely because it did not constitute legitimate talk page comments, but snark which adds nothing to the (already lively) conversation. I was thus reverting an act of vandalism (the first time unintentionally). Furthermore, my reply has been deleted too (by User:JzG, obviously as a form of retaliation. I thus reverted two acts of vandalism. Fa suisse (talk) 10:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Negative, you do not take it upon yourself to decide whether comments made by editors in good standing are legitimate. And calling those comments vandalism is a

disruption, you will be sanctioned. El_C 10:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Your wording ("legitimate talk page comments") seems to imply that some comments can be removed. I see no specific reference to snarky/provocative comments as

not vandalism, and by the way, my (separate, and legitimate) comments were removed by User:JzG and by yourself, violating the rule of conduct you just mentioned. Fa suisse (talk) 10:39, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

When you insert a comment without also at the same time removing other editors' comments, then and only then will your submissions be allowed to be retained. El_C 10:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was not at the same time. My reply, my (intentional) deletion of the section, Jzg's "revert". Fa suisse (talk) 10:47, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there was no personal attack: I "attacked" the edit, not the user, and the policy page does not mention accusations of vandalism as personal attacks. Fa suisse (talk) 10:53, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is. Not all policy is written. And if you're not going to respect the textual integrity for the comments of other editors, expect other editors to show you the same discourtesy. El_C 10:54, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I admit to having placed the integrity of the talk page's content above the textual integrity of a random snarky section. Fa suisse (talk) 11:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again, that is not for you to decide. You are an involved editor, not an uninvolved admin like myself. El_C 11:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just here to put it on the record that this subtle revert at Robin DiAngelo could be read in good faith under different circumstances, but given the context of Fa suisse's other editing it might be an attempt at silently avoiding discussion at Talk:Robin DiAngelo#Reception section and hoping that other editors won't notice. — Bilorv (talk) 19:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, first of all, and most importantly, this was not a stealth edit. My edit summary : (→‎Education and career: diversity training : criticism by Pamela Newkirk in her book, and by JC Pan in article) could not be more explicit, in fact. So please do not make such an allegation. Seond, I must say that I did not remember any discussion about this specific content, but rather about the general merits of a

WP:CSECTION, which is now gone and which I am not attempting to reinstate. I have now checked the talk page for references to Newkirk's book and JC Pan's comments and there is indeed a mention, by you, of Newkirk's book. I somehow missed it: sorry and my bad. But I'd like to emphasize that you shouldn't imply that I'm trying to go "under the radar" without anything solid to it, especially given the very explicit edit summary (mentioning by name the author of a book and the nature of added content ("criticism")) and my previously frank engagement with you on the talk page. Again, this was clearly not a stealth edit. Fa suisse (talk) 02:05, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Blockchain and cryptocurrency general sanctions notification

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 page-specific restrictions , when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

Retimuko (talk) 04:27, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply