User talk:MordukhovichAleakin

Hello, I'm Seloloving. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Lee Hsien Loong, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Seloloving (talk) 01:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MordukhovichAleakin, I note your edit summary to TheEncyclopediaReader calling them ignorant. While editing Wikipedia, passions may run high as a matter of course, but we need to bear in mind Wikipedia's civility requirement, and comment on the contribution, not the editor. Please do read

WP:CIVIL. Please do also add sources for your contributions, especially if they are on articles of living people. You may reply here or message me on my talkpage if you require assistance. Cheers. Seloloving (talk) 21:11, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

You saw what he did, he removed the national language. Ridiculous! It's no wonder people keep assuming Singapore is part of China.

I understand, but we still have to remain civil with each other on Wikipedia. Please do refrain from using such labels again. As for my note on the biography of living persons on

WP:BLP and ensure that information should have reliable sources. If you wish to call the tenure of Goh's a one party state, you must have reliable sources backing the assertion. Seloloving (talk) 21:16, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Okay. But we both know SG is a one-party state, at least de-facto. I can say this on the talk page right? I assume you're Singaporean, so you know what I'm talking about. Let's not kid ourselves here. There's probably a news article out there calling Goh's rule as a continuance of PAP's hegemony but I'm too lazy now. I'd find one if I have the time.

De facto or not, we have to adhere to Wikipedia's rules, and

WP:ADVOCACY

) even though I understand the temptation. :

I understand throwing so many rules at you right now is not very conducive, so do ping me if you ever require further assistance. I suggest editing other articles you may have a hobby in to gradually learn about editing on Wikipedia, before returning to more contentious topics. That was what I did too. Seloloving (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MordukhovichAleakin. I understand you wish to

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, unless you also disagree with my edits, my edit was not "rejected by a number of editors" but rather simply one editor, that is Gandalfett. My edit stood for a few days before it was reverted by them, and hence there was ample time for it to be reverted by someone other than Gandalfett if it was indeed "rejected by number of editors". In addition, said user is not using the edit summary at all as to *why* they are reverting me per

bad-faith assuming I'm trying to disrupt Wikipedia is excessively hostile considering I simply made one revert and I was actually using the edit summary. MordukhovichAleakin (talk) 09:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply

]