|This is Steeletrap's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Steeletrap.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
- 1 Tu ne cede malis
- 2 Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations
- 3 ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
- 4 March 2017
- 5 1RR on Milo Yiannopoulos
- 6 1RR on Milo Yiannopoulos (again)
- 7 March 2017
- 8 Edits at Richard Epstein
- 9 A Friendly Word of Caution
- 10 Religion and hitler
- 11 Warning
- 12 April 2014
- 13 Disambiguation link notification for April 18
- 14 Ben Swann
- 15 April 2017
Tu ne cede malis
|The Austria Barnstar of National Merit|
|Presented to User Steeletrap.|
The sexual assaults were as you point out, assaults. The dressing room visits are sexual harassment since trump owned the pageant at the time. Please don't confuse the two. He did both of them so please stop removing sexual harassment references from the article. Trump is guilty of doing both. Octoberwoodland (talk) 17:55, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Milo Yiannopoulos, without citing a reliable source using an inline citation that clearly supports the material. The burden is on the person wishing to keep in the material to meet these requirements, as a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Distelfinck (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- I searched for the phrase "very often" on the Milo Yiannopolous talk page, and the occurences I could find don't back up what you say --Distelfinck (talk) 01:44, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
You need to provide sources for your additions. You repeat adding this in, without giving a source for this, without addressing what I said in this edit summary --Distelfinck (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
1RR on Milo Yiannopoulos
- I've reverted your edit myself. Please be more careful in the future. James J. Lambden (talk) 18:27, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
1RR on Milo Yiannopoulos (again)
You have again violated 1RR on Milo Yiannopoulos (Edits: 1, 2) If the 1RR restrictions are not clear to you they're described here: Wikipedia:1RR#Other_revert_rules. Self revert or I will submit a complaint against you to Arbitration Enforcement. James J. Lambden (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
|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 all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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 that 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.
Edits at Richard Epstein
In looking at your recent edits to Richard Epstein, I'd like you to consider whether the content you added could be cited to some sort of reliable sources. If so, they should be added to the section on Writings rather than to the intro. Depending on how significant your added content was, it might merit a summary mention (without citations) in the intro. I'll not revert you right now, but you should try to provide sources and place your content in the correct place in the article. Thanks. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:53, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- Hey JC; if you give me til tomorrow i"ll add the citations. Tied up right now. I understand if you feel compelled to revert in the short run. Steeletrap (talk) 03:59, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- It seems White whirlwind was not going to be patient. Try again tomorrow. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 04:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- I see similar potential problems with some of your recent edits at Richard Posner. That law review article you referenced is a bare URL, which is not a good way to cite a source. Can I also suggest that you make better use of WP:Edit summaries? — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 04:39, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
A Friendly Word of Caution
|The article Milo Yiannopoulos is subject to discretionary sanctions. In particular WP:1RR is in effect. One or more of your recent edits may have breached this rule. Specifically you must not re-add material to an article that has been challenged by reversion without first securing talk page consensus. Your contributions to the project are deeply appreciated but please be careful when editing on articles that deal with controversial subjects. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)|
Religion and hitler
Hi Steeltrap could you please add edit summaries for any significant changes to the Religious views of Adolf Hitler, stick to the four paragraph wikpedia lay out for the introduction and remember not to add material not in sources such as "the judges at Nuremberg" determined", when the source only says that the prosecutors prepared a brief of evidence etc. Best wishes Ozhistory (talk) 04:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe not a good edit w.o. some discussion, but hardly a violation, from what I can see. Have a look:  -- The edit shouldn't have been dropped in w.o. prep maybe, but I see ten worse edits per day in American Politics articles. Maybe a  is needed. SPECIFICO talk 18:11, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Here are a few reasons why the edit was inappropriate.
- Calling him a conspiracy theorist in the Lead section is inappropriate when he is not called that in the body of the article.
- In a 3-paragraph Lead section, the amount of detail in that addition is a violation of WP:WEIGHT in a highly visible BLP.
- The examples you give are gratuitous given the "controversial and false" sentence preceding your addition.
- "He has been described as" is textbook WP:WEASEL.
- Who is "the President" you refer to?
- The reason I jumped straight to a tban warning was because I've seen this kind of drive-by BLP violation from you before, and I distinctly remember User:Drmies warning you about adding links to child rape in the Lead of the trump article. (I don't have a diff for the warning but here's the edit:  ) ~Awilley (talk) 02:28, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- No, you jumped to a tban warning because you're an old maid who takes relish in your petty moderator powers. RS describe Trump as a conspiracy theorist, his campaign was characterized by conspiracy theories, and his political career in the Republican Party was fueled by the Birther movement. A bold edit noting that he has been described as a CT was not a violation of policy; I am not edit warring to put it back in.
- Trump has been accused of child rape. This particular accusation is not notable enough for the lede, but is included in the article about his sexual assault allegations. Steeletrap (talk) 11:08, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit. However, for contentious matters related to living people, a lack of consensus often results in the removal of the contentious matter, regardless of whether the proposal was to add, modify or remove it.
You want to add something to the article Milo Yiannopoulos. This getting removed is a strong indication there's no consensus, so this is a good time to discuss this --Distelfinck (talk) 16:10, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ben Stein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Expelled (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.
Your concern about these issues is totally understandable, but you have to review both the prior discussions (which were extensive on a number of things you changed) as well as the reliable sources before changing things based on your own gist of the subject matter. A number of your edits are blatantly against consensus. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ron Paul newsletters, without giving a valid reason – such as reverting vandalism – for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please remember, you are topic banned from editing anything related to the Mises Institute. This includes material about Ron Paul. – S. Rich (talk) 22:42, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for the revert; because Paul is apparently listed as a Mises Institute "scholar" (I had no idea), this is a technicala violation of the TB and I apologize.
- While your revert was appropriate, your rationale is bunk. Conspiracy theorists like Swann are not RS for anything apart from the mad ideas that are rattling around their brains. Steeletrap (talk) 17:49, 22 April 2017 (UTC)