Hello, I'm
AntiDionysius. I noticed that you recently
removed content from
Peronism without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use
your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
AntiDionysius (
talk)
18:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
Monito rapido. I spotted your changes to the Infobox Political Position tag in this article. You added the
far-right category alongside the existing
Right-wing one. I've looked at the two sources you gave to support this modification, viz.
[1] and
[2]. The latter source makes no mention of the Traditional Unionist Voice party other than to label them "hard right"
while the former source is from the French newspaper le Monde and is a subscription-only article of which I can only read the first couple of paragraphs and they don't mention the Traditional Unionist Voice party at all. So, I've reverted your edits because I can't see how the sources justify the modification you made. As always, if you think the edit should stand, then let's follow the conventional
WP:BRD process and open a thread on the talk page for the Traditional Unionist Voice article. Regards.
BrownBowler (
talk)
14:14, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
"sources quoted must be reliable sources"and another is that
"an opinion must not be quoted as a fact".
"Opinion The DUP in this election began to look like the lost tribe of the British Empire".
Wikipedia Bold, Revert, Discusscycle. Is there a reason why you prefer to simply edit the page directly without discussing your reasoning first? I note that you have been through the same exercise on the Reform UK talk page for instance, so you are clearly aware of the procedure.
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban
may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Drmies (
talk)
22:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
AntiDionysius. I noticed that you recently
removed content from
Peronism without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use
your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
AntiDionysius (
talk)
18:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello,
Monito rapido. I spotted your changes to the Infobox Political Position tag in this article. You added the
far-right category alongside the existing
Right-wing one. I've looked at the two sources you gave to support this modification, viz.
[1] and
[2]. The latter source makes no mention of the Traditional Unionist Voice party other than to label them "hard right"
while the former source is from the French newspaper le Monde and is a subscription-only article of which I can only read the first couple of paragraphs and they don't mention the Traditional Unionist Voice party at all. So, I've reverted your edits because I can't see how the sources justify the modification you made. As always, if you think the edit should stand, then let's follow the conventional
WP:BRD process and open a thread on the talk page for the Traditional Unionist Voice article. Regards.
BrownBowler (
talk)
14:14, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
"sources quoted must be reliable sources"and another is that
"an opinion must not be quoted as a fact".
"Opinion The DUP in this election began to look like the lost tribe of the British Empire".
Wikipedia Bold, Revert, Discusscycle. Is there a reason why you prefer to simply edit the page directly without discussing your reasoning first? I note that you have been through the same exercise on the Reform UK talk page for instance, so you are clearly aware of the procedure.
![]() | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is
allowed, but using them for
illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban
may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Drmies (
talk)
22:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC) |