User talk:Wikid77

User_talk:Wikid77
This is the talk-page for User:Wikid77 (checked for messages every few days).
Archives: 1 (May06-Feb08) 2 (Mar08-) 3 (Oct08-) 4 (May08-) 5 (Oct09-) 6 (Jan11-) 7 (Jan12-) 8 (Jan13-) 9 (Jan14-) 10 (Jan15-) 11 (Jan16-) 12 (Jan17-)

Archived 2011

I archived 31 topics of 2011 in /Archive_6. -Wikid77 17:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I archived 11 topics of 2011 in /Archive_6. -Wikid77 20:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I archived 37 topics of 2011 in /Archive_6. -Wikid77 12:52, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I archived 13 more topics of 2011 in /Archive_6. -Wikid77 13:10, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Archived 2012

I archived 50 topics of 2012 in /Archive_7. -Wikid77 05:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I archived 76 more topics of 2012 in /Archive_7. -Wikid77 12:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Archived 2013

I archived 47 topics of 2013 in /Archive_8. -Wikid77 11:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I archived 58 topics of 2013 in /Archive_8. -Wikid77 07:38, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I archived 7 topics of 2013 in /Archive_8. -Wikid77 14:46, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Archived 2014

I archived 84 topics of 2014 in /Archive_9. -Wikid77 14:57, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Archived 2015

I archived 12 topics of 2015 in /Archive_10. -Wikid77 15:17, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Archived 2016

I archived 69 topics of 2016 in /Archive_11. -Wikid77 15:45, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

I archived +30 topics of 2016 in /Archive_11. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archived 2017

I archived 87 topics of 2017 into /Archive_12. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

I have warned you previously about your racism. Your conduct at Talk:Jimbo Wales is reprehensible. It is disruptive. Please stop. Your next block will be longer. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:36, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think Jim is likely referring to User talk:Jimbo Wales rather than Talk:Jimbo Wales. MPS1992 (talk) 09:05, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Yes, the disruptive behavior took place at User talk:Jimbo Wales. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:44, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited New Spain, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Zapotec and Zoque (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely for espousing racist revisionism in support of slavery. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:16, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:51, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should have mentioned earlier that I have lived with black people for years. My first college roommate was black. I have black friends, I have worked for black people, and I have hired black people. Your ideas of "racist revisionism" are quite unusual. You seem to be upset by issues of white people and black people living together or working together. I have also worked with black charities in Africa. Maybe the confusion is "racial issues" versus "racist issues" and perhaps WP just lacks enough editors who have lived in mixed-race households. Wikipedia, overall, seems to be falling behind, and the calcification of article pages might be beyond repair at this stage. I hope you can relax and consider how your concerns might be viewed by mixed-race users. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

<stunned disbelief> E Eng 03:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen has white friends, I believe. Drmies (talk) 03:32, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some of my best friends are ... well never mind. Just talk to Kanye. Softlavender (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I can't believe you mentioned the "Some of my best friends are..." racist trope. Please consider how your comments could be viewed by black users, who see "user Wikid77 being ridiculed because he has black friends" and that just reinforces the view that Wikipedia denigrates people who work with black coworkers. All such issues would seem inappropriate or deeply disturbing to many, so please refrain. -Wikid77 (talk) 19:20, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

<shocked into a state bordering on comatose> E Eng 19:28, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, what's going on here? I see EEng's name but I'm not seeing anything that would make me laugh as customary whenever I see his name (with few exceptions, and it appears this may be one of them). ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 19:40, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but perhaps he now realized that I am being denounced for "some of my friends...defence" ([1]) as if using such wording to attack a person for his friends would not be extremely offensive and hurtful to those friends. I am shocked as well. -Wikid77 (talk) 00:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He is shocked that this user would post material during an ANi along the same lines as material that lead to the the ANi. Legacypac (talk) 20:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I think the material they posted is much worse, such as "some of my friends...defence" (see: [2]) or "true colors" (when I lived with blacks & whites) so not a funny joke, as far worse than me noting "black slaveowners" (who sometimes bought their own relatives to avoid mistreatment). -Wikid77 (talk) 00:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since nobody has asked, Wikid77 do you have a statement you would like posted during this discussion on ANI? Your voice is noticeable absent and I thought you might have some response to the accusations about your remarks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: thanks for asking, and please post the following literal wikilinked text, and I'll periodically check ANI for latest remarks:

* "'''Response from Wikid77:''' [[User:Wikid77]] here. I'm sorry for all the confusion, and Cullen328 has posted specifics now about the various concerns over my remarks (see talk-page diff: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wikid77&diff=prev&oldid=873960906]). In the case where my remark was termed "racist nonsense" about "yard work" then I should have linked the entry ('yard': [http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199829941.001.0001/acref-9780199829941-e-52195]) in ''[[Oxford Reference]]'' (from [[Oxford University Press]]) to describe the workman as differing from a house servant as one working in the fields, but even then I saw many people did not want that issue discussed on [[User_talk:Jimbo Wales |Jimbo-talk]] as being too public a forum, especially for those unaware the field worker was a historic term, not a pejorative. In the 2nd case, I should have linked more sources, such as page "[[manumission]]" for how slaves could buy their freedom with regular payments, especially in Cuba. However, now after reading concerns at wp:ANI, I realize many people do not like discussing slavery on Jimbotalk and instead reach consensus on an article talk-page. <p>"I honestly did not realize there were Wikipedians still here who had checked dozens of books about slavery and wanted to present only the majority viewpoints, rather than present a topic from a range of various sources per wp:NPOV even years ago. I had thought the missing page "[[Slave weddings]]" was a tedious omission, to summarize over 10,000 antebellum weddings from U.S. government records, but now I suspect various pages were purposely omitted from Wikipedia, and I need to learn who is doing this and what can be done to bring Wikipedia forward. I had imagined when discussing these pages at Jimbotalk, then someone might say, "''Hey, ask at Wikiproject:Weddings''" or such, but instead got blocked for "racist revisionism" [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wikid77&diff=873636625&oldid=873138155]. Apparently all these slavery topics are tangent to WP racial problems or opposition to wp:NPOV. That might be why WP is decades behind in covering those topics. So tell friends to read specific outside sources, when Wikipedia omits a particular topic. -Wikid77 (talk) 08:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)"[reply]

Thanks, in advance, Liz, for whatever you can post before the deadline. I'm not concerned about the result because WP has become so tedious, it is almost impossible to make major improvements, or weeks later, all effort is reverted, or someone claims how fixes to 1,000 pages are worthless. Perhaps the most valuable achievement is to help others, as you have done here, and advise people to read sources outside of WP. -Wikid77 (talk) 08:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Previous warnings and block

Hello Wikid77. I have been asked on my talk page to provide links to the behavior that led to my previous warnings to you, and my block last month, and also a link to my June, 2018 warning.

My original warning was in response to a thread called Battle for freedom of speech re Roseanne during which you wrote " In fact to white Americans, the word "nigger" had come to mean a "hardworking servant" rather than an obstinate negro, and a white man might have said about mowing and trimming hedges, "I'll be a yard nigger all morning today" with zero reference to black skin, just the work. Since the "N-word" has been banned, other words have been invented to refer to black people who are organizing against whites (say no more)."

I gave the warning here at your talk page here, where I wrote "The next time you spout racist nonsense on Wikipedia, you will be blocked indefinitely. Conduct yourself accordingly." and also "This is a reminder of established policy and a formal warning: What Wikipedia is not says that "Wikipedia is free and open, but restricts both freedom and openness where they interfere with creating an encyclopedia. Accordingly, Wikipedia is not a forum for unregulated free speech." You are warned to avoid treating Wikipedia as a forum for your personal pet theories about racism and slavery and the meaning of racial slurs. Your comments have been disruptive and tendentious. Any more forum type commentary will lead to a block."

My block on November 21 resulted from a thread called Horrors of a POV-fork page, where you wrote "Well, check the facts of imagined "ill treatment" of African Americans, who actually often lived in the master's house, or had private rooms in the servant quarters of the mansion, or whose children played alongside the owner family, blacks with white children, or were given manumission liberty when the master died, etc."

These quotes of yours are representative samples of a much broader pattern of disruptive and tendentious editing. Other examples have been discussed at AN. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]