User talk:Ifnord

Additional archived messages are here.

vachanamrut

Hello,

Why did you only post a warning and undo my edit when I have the right to edit and remove the biases. Have you actually looked at the information that is being taken out? It misleads the reader.

Regards 136.2.16.181 (talk) 20:15, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

136.2.16.181, the message I placed on your talk page is quite detailed. I'm not sure which part of it you do not understand. In brief, you are in violation of WP:3RR and are removing referenced material without discussion on the article's talk page. Ifnord (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I understand the text clear, just not your reasoning for putting it only on my page. If something is wrongly posted in the article, does Wikipedia not allow me to edit it? If someone is disputing that edit, they are gladly allowed to discuss it. Blatantly misleading information is in the article. 136.2.16.181 (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Swaminarayan Sampradaya Page

Hello - I noticed your revert / warning for the unregistered user on the Vachanamrut page. This same unregistered user has been making large edits/deletions on the Swaminarayan Sampradaya article without engaging in talk page discussion despite many attempts to begin the talk. What can be done to avoid such conflict/constant edit warring? Thank you! Apollo1203 (talk) 20:41, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Now this user is lying. There is an active discussion going on and I only removed content that was not in a neutral point of view and made several edits that another user agreed with. 2:1 is not a consensus but this user has been monitoring the page and editting like they own the page. I would like a moderator to intervene cause this is out of control. How can a breakoff group that didn't exist be the source for an article of the group the broke off from? 136.2.16.181 (talk) 20:47, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Very simply: see WP:3RR. Ifnord (talk) 20:48, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

So wouldn't the other user be getting warnings as well?136.2.16.181 (talk) 20:51, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Signifying systemic racism

Why is a visible minority officer who was never found guilty of anything the only thing listed under Ottawa Police Service controversies? When there are plenty of white officers who have been found guilty of criminal charges and have current charges pending and all their stories are easily located online not mentioned? This content is not only highly offensive, inappropriate, inaccurate and racist, it is defamation of character and contributes to the issue of systemic racism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nojusticenopeace100 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Nojusticenopeace100. When there are two people, one hungry and one with food, the best solution is not to remove the food - it is to procure food and give it to the hungry one. In this case, the best result is not to remove referenced material regarding one officer but to add referenced material regarding all the officers you have mentioned. You are welcome to do so; if you need help with referencing, I will be happy to help. Ifnord (talk) 21:16, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

So extreme homophobia and literal mass murder of homosexuals is neutral?

As above. It's not a false dichotomy, you're either against murder of LGBT peoples or you're for it.