Jump to content

User talk:Hustlecat/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Hustlecat, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Medak. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! DThomsen8 (talk) 17:18, 16 May 2014 (UTC)


Franz Fühmann

Thanks for your help with the GOCE drive. When I was looking for a new article to edit, I noticed the inadvertent conflict between you and Writeswift. I used to use the {{GOCEinuse}} tag, but it kept getting removed overnight while I slept :-). What I've found helpful is a suggestion from Stfg: first, check the history for recent copyediting and then remove the tag before you begin the copyedit. Hope this helps. Have fun and all the best, Miniapolis 00:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry about the confusion, I had been doing some casual copyediting on random articles before I read about/signed up for the drive- Didn't mean to step on anyone's toes! --Hustlecat (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Miss Gay America edit discussion

Thank you for editing the Miss Gay America page. While I appreciate your contributions to the writing style and some of the formatting, you must understand that I created this page because the current website lacks organized historical value. Unlike the real Miss America, former Miss Gay America's are celebrated long after they've passed their titles - they are an institution on their own. I've spent a long time compiling this information, and it's no where near complete. We're talking 45 years of an average of 60 national contestants per year, plus the many state and city titleholders not even mentioned in this article that have shaped the LGBT movement.

It's very important the top 10 listing be maintained, but the former titleholder's section is so freaking long because of it. I'm going to attempt to form a different Wikipedia table in the section for that listing. This way it will provide the information, but reduce the cumbersome length of the Former's section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MGAR2020 (talk • contribs) 06:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

I responded to this comment on User talk:MGAR2020. Hustlecat (talk) 12:57, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

The Guild

I was wondering if you might consider adding your name to the list of members of the GOCE? I actually made it a point to check the list before I reverted some of your changes to the article on Udham Singh. Thanks and sorry for any confusion. Hammersbach (talk) 13:14, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Oops! Done! Sorry, didn't know there was an additional step after signing up for the backlog drive. Thanks! --Hustlecat (talk) 13:32, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Riot (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Colliers
Udham Singh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Central Criminal Court

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:GOCE May 2014 backlog elimination drive barnstar

The Modest Barnstar
For copy editing more than 4000 words in the Guild of Copy Editors' May 2014 backlog elimination drive, please accept this barnstar along with our thanks. —Torchiest talkedits 18:26, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1969–70 Tercera División may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Civility Barnstar
One of the more unbiased and well meaning editors on this site. Tutelary (talk) 02:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1970–71 New York Nets season
added a link pointing to St. John's University
1972–73 New York Nets season
added a link pointing to St. John's University

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Regarding your Arbcom statement on Gamergate

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

...a controversy that has begun because real people have been doxxed and harassed for their beliefs that women should be treated as equals in society...

I'm not sure you understand the situation. From your perspective, you may believe this to be a true and accurate summary of the situation. But from the GG perspective, the controversy began because people have been making statements like that, in blatant contradiction to what people in GG know to be true and trivially verifiable.

Seriously, where are the people who don't believe that women should be treated as equals? How is that notion evidenced in any way by what's being said on the GG tag? The statements that people object to from Sarkeesian et. al. go far, far beyond that and have nothing to do with equal rights for women. If this is really all about harassing women, then how is it that on a hashtag that has gathered literally over three million tweets, the supposed targets are few enough to be enumerated by name? You're aware, I hope, that Gjoni's blog post came out almost two whole weeks before the introduction of the #Gamergate tag - a long time on the Internet - and that a great many things were discovered during that period, yes? You understand that the coinage "Gamergate" is explicitly designed to connote a scandal involving censorship, yes? Even early talk on the tag was not about Quinn nearly so much as about not being allowed to talk about Quinn.

I'd like to ask you to consider the perspective of other people here. I'll leave you with a link that describes pretty well what I see going on in the "social justice" scene: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/07/social-justice-and-words-words-words/

74.12.93.242 (talk) 19:32, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm sorry you take offense to my commentary on the situation.
The whole situation essentially began because of inquiries into Zoe Quinn's sex life. You may not have experienced this personally, but there is a frequent double standard in society with regards to women and their sex lives (see this link for one take on it: [1]). As for censorship: It's not censorship to call out baseless claims, anti-feminism, and sexism for what they are. See this article: [2].
It is not "about" harassing women. It is on one level about fear of change, where the change is that games are being expanded into the art form they truly are, examining social issues and challenging players' preexisting views instead of simply providing entertainment. If you examine reliable sources on the issue, you will see that it has manifested as attacks on women who are interested in the field, have a progressive political leaning, and let that influence their work.
If you are truly interested in enacting positive change, the circumstances surrounding Gamergate are not ideal for this, as it has shown that the field of gaming is unwelcoming to women (which is true of many tech fields), and so a large number of people who care about equality will be unwilling to take the "movement" at face value until it is fixed.
As far as the "social justice scene": There is no "scene". "Social justice" is not a trend, a movement or an insult - it is the concept of equality and opportunity for humanity, and it is either something you care about, or don't care about. You either spend your time working to learn about and eliminate racism, sexism, poverty, etc., or you don't. If you have problems with the terminology used, you can always respectfully and nonjudgementally ask someone to explain it, and more likely than not they will respectfully and nonjudgementally answer you.
I highly recommend this article for further reading on the situation: [3] Although it is very long, and in all caps, it is written in a very respectful way by someone who knows what he is talking about. His field is film, not video games, but they are both modern art forms and as such are equally valuable lenses for examining the human condition.
Thanks for taking the time to comment. I find this issue very interesting as it is a uniquely modern manifestation of classic conservative vs. liberal social conflicts. It has led me to read more about conflicts of interest in video gaming, and I hope it will lead you to read more about the gender and culture issues that "gamergate critics" are pointing out, as they are prevalent in all facets of society, not just video gaming.
Peace, Hustlecat do it! 20:34, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Your presumed irony in your non-apology is noted. I'm afraid you have either completely misunderstood or misrepresented my complaint. The censorship I'm referring to has nothing to do with "calling out baseless claims". It has to do with suppressing information about the claims with an actual basis in order to pretend that one baseless claim, which I can't even find a primary source for (it's certainly not in anything Eron said). It has to do with mass deletion of comments from threads (e.g. the Reddit thread about TotalBiscuit discussing the issue where about 25,000 comments were automatically deleted, a far more draconian measure than the standard thread removal), disabling of comments in places where they'd normally be allowed (e.g. on Comedy Central's page for Sarkeesian's Colbert interview), fraudulent use of DMCA claims (cf. MundaneMatt's video from early on), and much more. These are well catalogued, documented incidents where claims were objectively removed, not "called out". That's censorship plain and simple.
Your bit about the "circumstances surrounding Gamergate" read as plain and simple concern trolling that is beyond tired to everyone involved by now. In reality, the movement is already being taken seriously by many people, and the resulting changes in the industry have been catalogued as well.
The use of quotes in the phrase "social justice" scene was deliberate, to indicate irony on my part. I am not talking about the actual concept of social justice. I am talking about frauds who abuse the term to their own ends. I'm not entirely sure how this was unclear, except perhaps if you didn't actually read my link. I have, in fact, tried that "respectful and nonjudgmental" route. Many times. It does not work. Their idea of "respect" appears to consist of uncritical agreement. My extensive experience on the Internet with people taking up this mantle is that they do not give a damn about poverty, are frequently sexist in their own way, and have a stunning lack of self-awareness.
You have linked me to an article on the same website that employs Devin Faraci (who famously referred to Gamergaters as "worse than ISIS"), and which is written in all caps across its entire length. I cannot fathom why how you could possibly expect me to agree with your assessment of this as "respectful" or insightful.
I categorically reject your "classic conservative vs. liberal" framing and find it deeply and personally insulting. I am an NDP voter and strongly believe in principles of social welfare. The rhetoric you're employing here is part of the same propaganda narrative that attempts to discredit Christina Hoff Sommers as a "conservative" despite her own identification, her own expressed ideas, and the fact that the only ties she has to conservatism are just as strong for Ayaan Hirsi Ali. I am extremely well read on "the gender and culture issues". I have been engaged in Internet arguments about "the gender and culture issues" for probably over a decade now. I am not interested in hearing "but you just don't understand" from someone I disagree with for the N+1th time.

76.64.35.209 (talk) 10:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I am not interested in hearing "but you just don't understand" from someone I disagree with for the N+1th time.
Well that's unfortunate, because that seems to be the extent of every pro-gamergate argument I've heard.
As for "frauds", I prefer to assume that everyone is trying to teach and learn. If you prefer to reject sources based on their associations rather than their arguments, then you're going to have a difficult time engaging with anyone.
If your politics are as you say they are, I recommend you devote your time to more pressing social issues.
Hustlecat do it! 15:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
I, too, like to assume good faith. However, in the case of the people I'm talking about, I have had that assumption repeatedly and consistently proven wrong. There is no possibly "more pressing social issue" than calling out those who co-opt the politics of those who are actually interested in positive change. As for "but you just don't understand" characterizing pro-GG arguments, what about the one I just gave you, with all the sources, reasoning and discussion? Your dismissiveness here strikes me as hypocritical. I gave you concrete evidence of widespread censorship and you ignored me, twice. 76.64.35.209 (talk) 16:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
I read your first link and gave you my assessment on its use of "social justice." You stated that you refused to read my link because someone you dislike writes for the same blog. Censorship may have become the main concern of those involved in Gamergate but many of the claims are nonissues as private companies are free to publish, not-publish, and turn off their blog comments as they please and anyone is welcome to attempt to use the DMCA to their own advantage if they so desire. I no longer wish to continue this discussion as you clearly do not want to discuss the initiating issue of Gamergate's harassment of women in gaming (as has been reported by MANY reliable sources), you only wish to shower me with countless blog and opinion sources such as twitter and reddit and your own subjective experience "on the internet" to tell me "that's not what it's about." In the real world, women are facing a ton of shit, of which this fiasco is only a shit layer on the shit cake. You can't handwave away harassment and then expect to convince reasonable people that your cause is still good. Bye now. Hustlecat do it! 21:01, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vasil Buraliev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mizar. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Notice

Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy, such as Talk:Gamergate controversy, which you have recently edited.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. Strongjam (talk) 20:29, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 11, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 22:27, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bibliography of American Civil War Union military unit histories
added links pointing to Appomattox and Bull Run
François Truffaut bibliography
added a link pointing to Knopf

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:48, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done these have been fixed Hustlecat do it! 18:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Counterpart International
added links pointing to Conservation and Marist
Counterplanning
added links pointing to Diversion and Conflict
Danish Sale of Goods Act
added links pointing to Commercial and Defective
Business relationship management
added a link pointing to Trust
CARTO
added a link pointing to Radiation exposure
Flipside film festival
added a link pointing to Home movie
Progressive segmented frame
added a link pointing to High definition

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done - All are now fixed. Hustlecat do it! 18:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)


Archive 1
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hustlecat/Archive_1&oldid=1091672728"