User talk:67.248.17.85

You were notified previously of WP:GS/Crypto - you can't claim ignorance of its sanctions against your recent edit-warring. Please desist - David Gerard (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was very clear ahead of time to me that your "unexplained revert" was merely an attempt to draw someone into a "sanctions" booby trap. I reverted that WP:tendentious edit anyway and discovered that YES, it was -- as evidenced by ANOTHER bullying attempt here (above) in addition to the attempt you made here a year ago.

You need to knock it off. You are clearly playing some kind of disruptive game just to WIN, not to build an encyclopedia. Stop trying to throw your admin weight around. You have "big fish in small pond" issues. Your "contribution" history supports this.

All this over the date on a tag? Stop wasting people's time over things so stupid.

67.248.17.85 (talk) 20:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COI editnotice[edit]

Hello, the COI editnotice on article talkpages is a general-purpose tag to inform possible COI editors (both past and future ones) of our policies - especially in articles that have been affected by COI problems in the past. It has a different purpose than the article tag on the main page. Please see Template:COI editnotice for more information. GermanJoe (talk) 20:34, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a "a general-purpose tag". There's no such thing. The tag has no specificity. There's no reason for it. There's nobody trying to edit as a "COI editor". There's otherwise no tradition of placing such a "general-purpose tag" on talk pages for no stated reason but for to "head them off". If there is a specific reason for it, then by all means replace it, but add in the specific reason (offending editor and passages with good evidence) at the same time. 67.248.17.85 (talk) 21:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This tag is a remnant of the similarly-unjustifed "too-close" tag on the main page. That tag on the main page was removed there for the same reasons as this tag was removed here. Please review the edit summaries and talk page commentary about the problems with the too-close tag on the main page.

On the main page, the tag was replaced with the much more apt "too many primary sources" tag and that seems to have been accepted there. This tag removal is just a completion of the similar-tag removal from the main page. 67.248.17.85 (talk) 21:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The talkpage template is valid per its template documentation (and common practise): "Use this template on the talk page of an article where COI editing has occurred." - read Template:COI editnotice. COI editing has unquestionably occured for this article in the past and the article has a high risk of future COI activity, so the tag should stay. 2 editors have disagreed with your removal of this tag by now (myself and Grayfell) - if you believe it should be removed, feel free to start a thread for discussion at the article talkpage to change this consensus. Further arguments are better posted there anyway to allow a centralized discussion. GermanJoe (talk) 22:36, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1) Try Template:Uw-coi instead to notify any COI editor, in the time and place, rather than over-tagging (forever) a page just because someone unspecified might have been a bad actor once some time ago. Just deal with it as it comes (infrequently) via Template:Uw-coi. That mealy-mouthed ineffectual little tag isn't actually going to prevent any of it.

2) It's not "common practise". It's actually very uncommon, thankfully.

3) COI editing has not "unquestioningly occurred". Proof of that: I'm questioning it. Like the "too-close" tag on the main page, no specification justification has been provided, etc. If you don't want anybody to question it, you need to provide evidence for it.

4) The real problem is the too-many-primary-sources problem. The main page's tags have been reoriented to highlight that instead of the muddled "too-close" substitute for it. If you really really feel you need a tag to help prevent a real problem, maybe there's an equivalent tag for talk pages for primary sources.

67-248-17-85 (talk) 03:26, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.