User talk:Royalcourtier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, Royalcourtier! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Faizan 11:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help


Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Disambiguation link notification for April 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of ethnic slurs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maori (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

October 2014[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Commander-in-chief are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Chief Ministers of KwaNdebele, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transvaal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:How Bizarre (song) are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. -- haminoon (talk) 10:02, 16 March 2015 (UTC) I have found over time that it is the Left & Right wing parties that are the cesspit of classical Financier driven Fascism. Those parties that support the Globalist Free market system that really create Fascist governments through populist Regime plots such as the so called color revolutions of the past 20 years & continuing at the moment! If a government tries to do what is right for the people & the land they are said to be Communist or Fascist by those so called educated cultureless majorities! I see no wings on the CEC if anything they are more human than any of the governments we have had in Australia since Geoff Whitlam, & as we witnessed with PM Whitlam, the Royal Monetarist Nazis had him sacked so is Australia a free nation???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.229.54 (talk) 05:56, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Black Velvet Band, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English Music (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:14, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

ARBCOM decision on transgender issues and your misgendering of Brandon Teena[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g. hebephilia), a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Your comments on the talk page were exceptionally offensive. MrX was kind enough to point you to the Wikipedia policy regarding the topic. I will also point you to this statement by the arbitration committee about offensive comments against trans people. If you continue such behavior you may be blocked. This is your only warning. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 16:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Might I ask what you regard to be exceptionally offensive? My use of the word "deluded", which I have withdrawn, or my reference to Teena's mental illness - which was referred to in the article itself?Royalcourtier (talk) 04:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
In this edit, you misgender the subject. EvergreenFir already mentioned misgendering in the subheading. -- haminoon (talk) 05:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Haminoon is correct. Misgendering + "deluded" were the worst parts. Wikipedia's policy is clear: no one cares what you personally thing the pronouns should be, only what the subject of the article says they are. If you continue to misgender on the talk page or insist pronouns should be something else as you did here, I will submit an arbitration enforcement request. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

May 2015[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Keith Locke for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:22, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

My comment was not general discussion, though perhaps I should have been more specific: I believe Locke's political position ought to be mentioned in the article, rather than essentially evaded.Royalcourtier (talk) 00:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
The template is rather generic. The "forum" behavior was for the use of "lunatic left". Please aim to be more neutral and less polemic, especially when commenting on political pages and pages related to living people. Cheers. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Can you please explain what is not neutral about suggesting that a communist should be described as such? I doubt that you would argue that, in the pursuit of such neutrality, the article on Chairman Mao should be edited to remove all references to Communism!Royalcourtier (talk) 23:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Propaganda[edit]

Wikipedia is not a vehicle for propaganda. I found a couple of edits from you, in a talk page, claiming that Conservative and Catholic is the antithesis of fascism. The fact is, the reference for fascism is the Benito Mussolini's system in Italy, a catholic and conservative regime [1]. I can only guess that your comment is the result of misinformation. I'm give you the benefice of the doubt in assuming that it was just miss information. Nevertheless, it is a known propaganda talking point used by the religious right wing in the united states, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for propaganda. In the future please refrain from spreading propaganda, miss information or presenting your opinion as fact in wikipedia.

References

  1. ^ Emanuele Mastrangelo, I canti del littorio: storia del fascismo attraverso le canzoni, Lo Scarabeo, 2006; Giacomo De Marzi, I canti di Salò, Fratelli Frilli, 2005
Can you please advise what is a "known propaganda talking point used by the religious right wing in the united states". I assume that you are not referring to fascism, as I doubt the US religious right makes any regular references to fascism. Or are you suggesting that the US religious right is fascist (surely an extreme view). And why is a reference to something that you say is a "known propaganda talking point" therefore itself propaganda, and to be excluded from Wikipedia? Such reasoning would rule out much of what is written in Wikipedia about, for instance, left wing economics, on the basis that certain doctrines and theories are Marxist, and therefore references to them is propaganda. Surely you are not suggesting Wikipedia should be censored to that extent.Royalcourtier (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

July 2015[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Mahatma Gandhi, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 11:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

August 2015[edit]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Roman salute, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 09:49, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Can you please advise me what you regard as being disruptive or inappropriate about my edit?Royalcourtier (talk) 23:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
It's laid out at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Talk pages are for article improvement discussions, not for general discussion of the topic. Binksternet (talk) 23:45, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
But can you please tell me what you regard as disruptive or inappropriate about what I wrote? I don't see anything that I wrote that was inconsistent with the tone or general nature of what others had already written on the talk page.Royalcourtier (talk) 05:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions, as you did at Talk:2014–15 Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Can you please advise what you regard as being inappropriate about what I wrote, and so inappropriate as to warrant the suggestion of blocking? There is a very extensive number of contributions on that page discussing what the Russian military intervention in Crimea ought to be called - invasion, intervention, etc. Why is my contribution deemed by you to be inappropriate and to be censored?Royalcourtier (talk) 05:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Please read WP:NOTOPINION. Talk pages are not forums or general discussion about a subject. If you wish to engage in such a manner, you are welcome to join or start up a blog. Thank you for your understanding. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. For my education, can you please advise why my contribution to a very very extensive number of contributions on that page is deemed by you to be inappropriate and to be censored?Royalcourtier (talk) 06:24, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@Royalcourtier: Please, take a look at a conversation you started, but did not continue: False Suggestion of Racial Motive Contributions that consider all the arguments, bring in credible sources and are devoid, as much as possible, of personal point of views, are much helpful to the WP community. Historiador (talk) 06:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@Royalcourtier: Hoping you could find ways to contribute to WP that are constructive, I suggest reading this article: Wikipedia:Disruptive editing. It is required reading in a training for editors wanting to improve their skills. Historiador (talk) 12:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. But why am I apparently being held responsible for what others wrote subsequent to my contribution? In any event, I did not start the conversation, it had been going for months before I contributed to it.Royalcourtier (talk) 21:21, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

December 2015[edit]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, you may be blocked from editing.
Stop going from article talk page to article talk page in order to use it as a vehicle for WP:ADVOCACY. This behaviour has been ongoing and disruptive.
Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:38, 30 December 2015 (UTC) Please advise what edits you consider to be disruptive.Royalcourtier (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Ruby Ridge[edit]

Hello RoyalCourtier. I've reverted an edit you made on Ruby Ridge because the wording violates WP:NPOV. I agree, btw, that what you wrote is probably correct, but to say it the way you did is not encyclopedic -- we have to let people read between the lines lest the entire article be dismissed as supporting a particular point of view. I've also commented on one of your talk-page comments on that same article. Please ping me if you reply here Etamni | ✉   13:07, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Promotion of Terrorist Propoganda[edit]

Your use of the ISIL talk page to promote ISIL's propaganda and insist, with no sources, that the terrorist group is a state is very inappropriate. Given your past inappropriate editing activity and use of talk pages to promote fringe views, I suggest you review relevant WP policy on WP:RS and the purpose of Wikipedia before you do much more editing. If you continue down this line I will seek a block against you. Legacypac (talk) 00:47, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Stating that the evidence suggests that ISIL is a state is not promoting the group. To suggest that is so is illogical and defamatory. There is plenty of evidence that the group has established a state; it is not the first terrorist or rebel group to do so. To argue that ISIL/ISIS meets the definition of a state is not the same as supporting that group. I happen to believe that Nazi Germany was a state too, but I do not support that state or what it did. Read this article - https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/isis-not-terrorist-group. I am not promoting fringe views about anything, and have never done so on Wikipedia. Your unjustified and absurd criticism of me is inappropriate. If you continue to attempt to censor Wikipedia to promote your own agenda, or to defame other editors, I will seek to block you. I see that you have a history of disruptive edits, and of making false allegations against editors.Royalcourtier (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Maori treaty of Waitangi breaches-your question[edit]

Some time ago you asked if there were instances of Maori breaking the Treaty of Waitangi in NZ. The Waitangi Tribunal was set up by the government of NZ about 30 years ago to look into Government breaches of the treaty as a result of ongoing ill feeling from Maori towards the crown -mainly as a result of Maori land confiscations in 1863. The tribunal is the only body that can investigate and it can only look at Govt breaches. The tribunal was normally held on Maori marae(meeting houses) and proceedings were in Maori generally. The appointed judges all spoke fluent Maori and many were Maori. Unlike a court of law hearsay was allowed and in many cases given preference to information from written records. Often the hearsay was from living people describing events 150 years ago that have passed into Maori or iwi(tribal) mythology as " fact". There is no body to investigate Maori breaches of the treaty because that was not a political reality in an country using the MMP voting system where minorities can have far more influence than their small numbers suggest.

Contrary to what some editors have suggested there certainly were Maori breaches of the treaty. I had a discussion recently with an author to ask why they dont write about certain specific events where Maori en mass broke the law. Their reply was -first the publisher wouldn't print it. Secondly he would be ridiculed and ostracized. Their job would be in danger. In other words there is no political will or mood or "need" to investigate Maori breaches.

Speculation: If breaches were based on the Treaty clauses -setting up an alternative separatist govt would be a good place to start.Then move on to attacking and murdering settlers or attempted assassination of the governor would follow. The tribunal found that Maori(well, the ones that rebelled) were fighting a defensive war.This is the standard line of response. There is no discussion at all, ever, about the need for the then govt to protect NZ from internal attack and disintegration. Rebels set up an illegal land league and intimidated other Maori who wanted to sell land.(A few willing Maori sellers were just murdered). The tribunal repeatedly breached its own rules eg (preventing pre 1840 evidence being heard).The practical reason for this rule was that in the period 1807-1840 Maori fought about 500 battles (Musket Wars) among themselves to try and kill off their neighbours (often distant ones)and seize their lands. Often Maori within their own tribe fought each other but the most violent and bitter struggles were between long term enemies seeking revenge on each other(Utu in Maori).This included mass killings, torture , slavery, forced "marriages" and other barbaric behaviours especially eating their enemies. Constant public exposure of this kind of behaviour was not politically acceptable, particularly as Maori society today is still extremely violent (conviction rates for serious crime is very high-Maori make up 15% of the population now but 50% of those in jail).

A key point to remember is that the 1860 Kingitanga rebels were very much a minority-by far the majority of Maori supported the govt or remained neutral. In 1864 there were about 55,000 Maori of which about perhaps 3,000-4,000 lived in the separatist state known as the "King Country".However not all in the KC actually supported the King -the number of supporter had dropped to about 1,000 by 1884.115.188.178.77 (talk) 22:17, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

War of 1812[edit]

Just to let you know, I spotted your talk section on the war of 1812 infobox, and I have always thought it odd that in the infobox, instead of a war result, there is a reference to the result of the negotiation. Anyways, they discussion has been continuing, with some "passion" (as is the norm on that page, unfortunately). Feel free to pop in and comment. I'm trying to get the infobox re-written so it is more useful to the reader, and more NPOV. Deathlibrarian (talk) 09:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Changing sourced content[edit]

Please do not changed sourced content to data not found in the source, as you did in this edit. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:15, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

The sources do not say that Chappie is not a South African film. Chappie is more of a South African than it is an American film. The source only indicates that the film has American makers, which I left intact.Royalcourtier (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fort Detrick, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Invasion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Your Vandalism on "Annexation of Portuguese India"[edit]

You changed the caption of one of the most well known photographs of the Indian invasion of Goa from "Indian troops are greeted by supporters" to "Indian troops are surrounded by hostile civilians". Please share with me your source for this. The civilians in the photograph are seen smiling and waving to the camera along with the soldiers and would probably not qualify as 'hostile'. Or should I take this as an act of deliberate vandalism?Tigerassault (talk) 10:01, 21 August 2016 (UTC)