User talk:2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357

August 2024

Hello, I'm Gaismagorm. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Liberalism in the United States have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Gaismagorm (talk) 15:50, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Liberalism in the United States. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Please discuss this on the talk page before you add it again. Thanks. Additionally, per WP:NYPOST the New York Post should not be used on Wikipedia; the Washington Times should not be used on Wikipedia for particularly contentious political claims per WP:RSP. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Liberalism in the United States, you may be blocked from editing. Further to what Staraction noted above, your unreliable sources don't even support what you're trying to add to the article. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Posted a link to an article backing up my claim. Isnt that what you Leftists keep crying about? Making sure to post verifiable claims? I posted not one but TWO links backing up my claims. 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

mhm, liberalism is an ideology and should be defined as such. Besides, see above message about the reliability of sources you used. Gaismagorm (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

No, you didn't. You posted two links to articles (on websites considered unreliable by Wikipedia) which said something entirely different to your claim. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

How about a link to a College that backs up said claim? https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/why-depression-rates-are-higher-among-liberals 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

that just says that liberals have higher depression rates, you are saying liberalism is a mental illness. currently it is not listed on the dsm 5th edition. Gaismagorm (talk) 16:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/unique-everybody-else/202103/personality-traits-mental-illness-and-ideology 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

show something saying that it's listed on the dsm 5th edition Gaismagorm (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Still doesn't say liberalism is a mental illness. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, again, that doesn't back up your claim. The study in question noted that there is a statistically higher rate of mental illness among people who identify as liberal. That is not at all the same thing as "liberalism is a mental disorder". AntiDionysius (talk) 16:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

And yet, on the Wikipedia page regarding conservatism, you left in the part where we oppose LGBT rights. When that is false. Conservatives don't oppose the LGBTQ rights. We oppose them demanding we accept them or risk losing our jobs. Gotta love the bias. 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

how is that at all related to you claiming liberalism is a mental disorder, the statement on conservatism is far more factually accurate Gaismagorm (talk) 16:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

LMAO. It is not factually accurate. Again, the Leftist bias is stunning. 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

✨stunning✨ Gaismagorm (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If you would like to suggest a change to that page, I would invite you to start a discussion on Talk:Conservatism. But personally, having had to fight to get marriage equality legalised in my country and therefore possessing a keen awareness of who opposes my rights as a queer person, I think you are unlikely to get consensus for that change. But discussion is good, so if you want to you should. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Also taking a quick look at the page on conservatism, it doesn't say that. It says Vladimir Putin opposes LGBT rights, and it says religious conservatives (not all) "typically" (i.e. not always) "oppose...LGBT behaviour (or, in certain cases, identity)". AntiDionysius (talk) 16:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

This is copied exactly from the Conservatism in The United States page as it is right now: "Conservatism in the United States is not a single school of thought. American conservatives tend to support Christian values, moral absolutism, traditional family values, and American exceptionalism, while opposing abortion, euthanasia, and LGBT rights. They tend to favor economic liberalism, and are generally pro-business and pro-capitalism, while opposing communism and labor unions." Please show me in this post where it says anything about Putin. 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

"tend to" that doesn't say always. Gaismagorm (talk) 16:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

You said the "page regarding conservatism", not the "page for conservatism in the united states", so I was looking at Conservatism. It may shock you, but other countries exist. You may even be speaking to someone from one of them right now.

That page says that US conservatives "tend" to hold those beliefs, not that every single one of them does. That claim of a general trend is backed up by citations within the article, and frankly seems pretty self-evidently true to me. But Talk:Conservatism in the United States is at your disposal should you want to challenge it. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

And yet, you still erased the truth from the Conservatism in the United States page. Derp! 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

And would my suggestion be taken seriously or much like your bias would you dismiss it with prejudice? 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't tell you how seriously or not other people would take it; you'd have to ask those other people. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

well, they just ignored the talk page of conservatism in the united states and went straight to the page itself Gaismagorm (talk) 16:41, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I reverted it Gaismagorm (talk) 16:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

no problem Gaismagorm (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Because I know you'd ignore the talk page regarding this. Because facts hurt your feelings. The LGBTQ have more rights in America than anywhere else in the world. 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that second part is obviously, objectively, provably factually untrue. But your assumption that you'd be ignored on the talk page does not actually give you the right to remove well-cited information without consensus. Please do not try to do so again. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Please shiw me valid proof that the LGBTQ community have less rights here in America than say Iran, where being Gay is illegal. Derp! 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Who said anything about Iran? Your claim was "more rights in America than anywhere else in the world". I was going to make comparisons to various European countries; Ireland, Norway, the Netherlands etc. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Let's try to refrain from personal attacks, please check out WP:PERSONALATTACKS. Staraction (talk | contribs) 16:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Conservatism in the United States, you may be blocked from editing. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I will not stop erasing lies. 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If you won't stop erasing well-sourced content, you will be blocked from editing, like the warning says. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Well sourced from whom? What credible website? What non biased source? Because i see no credible source, just blatant lies 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If you click the little footnotes at the end of sentences, it tells you the source. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:59, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

You're free to tell yourself that this is liberal bias (or leftist bias - you should really pick which one it is) if you so choose, but you're just violating Wikipedia policy. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

So Wikipedia policy is dont post facts and erase blatant Leftist lies? 2603:6011:9B22:4B31:938F:3967:BFBF:3357 (talk) 16:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

It's that you don't get to remove things backed up by reliable sources based on your unsubstantiated claim that they're "lies". AntiDionysius (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

no it's post factual information, which you have failed to do Gaismagorm (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Please note that Wikipedia policy requires verifiability, and all added claims must be backed up by a reliable source. Staraction (talk | contribs) 16:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Conservatism in the United States. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Please also note WP:CTOP when editing pages in the vein of Conservatism in the United States. Staraction (talk | contribs) 17:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

---