User talk:AU79G11

June 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm Dr.Pinsky. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Economy of Nazi Germany, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 07:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Pinksy, I left citations and provided sources. It appears that you removed content that was properly cited. AU79G11 (talk) 22:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source I left was from Yale Law School. AU79G11 (talk) 22:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anton Drexler[edit]

One might have thought that you would have learned from the reversion of your edits to Exonomy of Nazi Germany that using primary sources is, in most instances, not an improvement to Wikipedia articles, as they cannot be trusted to be accurate. You might also have learned that the "Socialist" in NSDAP has little to do with the actual beliefs and practices of the Nazis, including Drexler. Many authoritarians, for instance, call themselves or their parties "democratic", when they are far from it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's again, silly. You should actually learn what they meant by using the word Socialist. It was a German-styled socialism. Using primary sources is source. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not true. AU79G11 (talk) 22:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See the articles talk page. Nazis were not socialists. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:46, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nazis were in fact, Socialists. They took over industry, took control of private boards, expanded the welfare state, regulated small and large business extremes, regulated prices, regulated production. These are all socialistic ideals. AU79G11 (talk) 00:10, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Economy of Nazi Germany[edit]

Do not change statements in Wikipedia articles to be 180 degrees from what they were without providing rock-solid evidence in the form of citations from reliable sources. Wikipedia is not interested in your opinions, only in accurate facts backed by reliable sources. Continuing to make such changes can lead tyo your being clocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's silly. I provided actual sources of the 25 Point Program that is linked to the Nazi Party. These are not opinions as you suppose. You can't stop me from editing and making valid contributions that are backed up with historical reference. AU79G11 (talk) 22:33, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You provided a primary source to create an inacurate impression without the necessary secondary sources to provide appropriate context. See the article's talk page and WP:Primary sources. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:46, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I provided a source from Yale Law School. In the article itself, the Nazi party crushed small business with capital under 40k dollars. "Hitler's administration decreed an October 1937 policy that "dissolved all corporations with a capital under $40,000 and forbade the establishment of new ones with a capital less than $200,000," which swiftly effected the collapse of one-fifth of all small corporations." This is just one Socialistic policy of Government control over the economy. It is not an inaccurate impression. AU79G11 (talk) 00:29, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be under the misapprehension that you have to convince Wikipedia contributors that the Nazi's were socialists. You don't. You need to convince the many highly-qualified scholars specialising in the topic of Nazi Germany. The scholars we cite for such content. Scholars who are essentially unanimous in their appraisal of the position of the Nazi Government in the political spectrum. Which is on the far right. We go by scholarship, not arguments between ourselves. And that is all that needs to be said on the subject, since that is Wikipedia policy. And because you are blocked from editing, indefinitely, and thus the only legitimate use you can put this talk page to is to appeal your block. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: Edit warring on Economy of Nazi Germany and inappropriate use of primary source[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Economy of Nazi Germany. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Economy of Nazi Germany#Inappropriate use of primary source. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are currently engaged in removing references from Yale Law School that plainly state the party's platform. AU79G11 (talk) 22:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And you are entirely missing the point. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: Edit warring on Anton Drexler and inappropriate use of primary source[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Anton Drexler. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Anton Drexler#Inappropriate use of primary source. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Anton referred to himself as a Socialist. I understand that this offends you, but it doesn't remove the fact that it is clearly documented of his Socialist policies. AU79G11 (talk) 22:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
AU79G11, no one here is offended. We are warning you to stop violating our guidelines and policies. The next step is an administrators' noticeboard. You may get something out of reading WP:NOTDUMB. Generalrelative (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not offended, then stop removing historical documentation. I simply posted the title of the book that Anton Drexler wrote and you keep deleting it. AU79G11 (talk) 23:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my posting: "In 1923, Anton Drexler wrote the book: My Political Awakening: From the Journal of German Socialist Worker." If you can cite that this is inaccurate, please do so. But, please, stop antagonizing me by removing historical, valid documentation. AU79G11 (talk) 23:04, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel 'antagonized' by being obliged to follow Wikipedia policies regarding article content, like everyone else, I suggest you find something else to do with your time. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
AndyTheGrump. How is posting the title of a book written by Anton Drexler (The one to whom the article is written) against "Wikipedia policy"? AU79G11 (talk) 23:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you can disprove my posting about the book, then please do so. If you can't, then there is not a reason to remove a valid claim. AU79G11 (talk) 23:21, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Edit warring is against Wikipedia policy. Inappropriate context-free use of primary sources is against Wikipedia policy. You have had ample opportunity to find out how this place actually works. And to discuss disputed edits in an appropriate place (starting at the relevant article talk page). Since it seems self-evident that you aren't prepared to work according to policy, I am not going to engage in futile debates with you here. Carry on as you are, and you will certainly be blocked from editing. We've seen this sort of nonsense before, and it doesn't work. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:29, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Anton Drexler wrote the book: My Political Awakening: From the Journal of a German Socialist Worker. It still has not been disputed that this is not accurate. AU79G11 (talk) 23:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some useful reading:

"At the peremptory request and desire of a large majority of the citizens of these United States, I, Joshua Norton, formerly of Algoa Bay, Cape of Good Hope, and now for the last 9 years and 10 months past of San Francisco, California, declare and proclaim myself Emperor of these United States; and in virtue of the authority thereby in me vested, do hereby order and direct the representatives of the different States of the Union to assemble in Musical Hall, of this city, on the 1st day of February next, then and there to make such alterations in the existing laws of the Union as may ameliorate the evils under which the country is laboring, and thereby cause confidence to exist, both at home and abroad, in our stability and integrity.

— NORTON I., Emperor of the United States."

We go by what secondary reliable sources say regarding the subject of our articles, not what they call themselves. And we don't cite book titles to mislead readers. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:45, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Generalrelative (talk) 23:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've revoked TPA so the user cannot continue to use this page as a platform for their political views.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]