User talk:DTMGO

I like Wikipedia! The most important policy: neutral point of view. Reread it often. --DTMGO (talk) 00:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DTMGO. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DTMGO. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DTMGO. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited War on drugs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ecstasy. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Legality of the War on Drugs into War on drugs. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 11:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Oppression, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Privilege.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of films featuring colonialism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orania.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in climate change. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Repeating, this is just a note, not a warning, and I'm not saying anything is wrong with your edits. As climate change is a controversial editing area, editors are expected to behave to higher standards than on other topics. Femke (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have forumshopped the topic to several articles. We need to limit it to one place. Right now I have commented at Talk:Pseudoscience#Holocaust_denial_is_a_pseudoscience. That's the mother article and a good place, so please keep all discussion there. Stop discussing elsewhere. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, there are only two articles about the topic, 1) Pseudoscience and 2) List of topics characterized as pseudoscience. We can discuss there. DTMGO (talk) 08:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. It's just those two. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:05, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. DTMGO (talk) 17:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"If I go looking for info, and Wikipedia doesn't have it, then Wikipedia has failed." — Baseball Bugs[1]

According to your userpage ("Wow, there is no entry for Power Asymmetry or Indigenous Genocide Denialism), you have discovered a couple failures. Go for it! -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 00:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will if I have time. DTMGO (talk) 09:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plot descriptions cannot be copied from other sources, including official sources and IMDb, unless these can be verified to be public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia. They must be written in original language to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. on The Untold History of the United States. — Diannaa (talk) 20:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did use the same text, and cited IMDB as a reference. DTMGO (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter whether you cite the source or not; copying from your sources is not okay. It's a violation of our copyrght policy to do so. — Diannaa (talk) 23:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DTMGO, I assume this is about the now-deleted edit at The Untold History of the United States. Fair use covers limited quoting (which, depending on the circumstances, can be anything from a single sentence to whole pages), but we generally frown on using IMDB as a source. Try to find your sources elsewhere and then try to use your own words, except for where an exact quote is called for. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 23:29, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you commented previously on the Scientific racism page and so I was hoping you might look at a change I've proposed, and on the feedback I'm getting from other editors. I'm proposing to add an entry on Thomas Malthus. You can see my proposed text in my sandbox, and feedback from other editors on Talk:Scientific racism#Thomas Malthus. It's a bit noisy, maybe clearer towards the end.

A general concern I have about the Scientific racism page is that it expends a lot of space on decontextualized racist quotes from 17th and 18th century individuals that while deeply offensive had questionable impact, as their racism was casual and incoherent, representing immature science and ordinary beliefs in their era. Meanwhile the page totally ignores individuals like Malthus, Spencer, Shockley and Terman whose racism is overt and strategic, and who were major figures in Social Darwinism and Eugenics, recognized precursors to fascism and genocide. JBradleyChen (talk) 04:34, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JBradleyChen I am no expert on this topic. Can only give general layman comments.

Yes Malthus´ influence on others is undeniable as you have RS about this, but Malthus himself you have to prove that there is broad consensus that he practiced scientific racism. His theory was untestable and unfalsifiable, therefore useless and baseless. Today it has not held up to reality. He argued for dangerous population controls, specially when the powerful have different ethnicity than the powerless, it can turn into genocide, and it did. It may have been a wrong idea, and in the hands of the wrong people, it turned lethal. Churchill blamed the Bengal famine on Indians as they had too many children.... ridiculous.

It seems like Malthus thought population should be controlled artificially, and he is classist saying that it must be controlled at the end of the poor (which would then happen to be non-whites during colonization) but it could also be poor British people. If you can find RS about this racism, and then support this content. Being an encyclopedia, it has to be a broad consensus, of expert opinion. Or at least a significant POV of an important sector, such as a government, NGOs, scholars, or some public figure.

It is hard to demonstrate intent, and hard to prove that something is systematic, but the British intellectuals worked to support imperialism, colonialism, classism and slavery. Many rubbed shoulders in the Royal Society. Chomsky writes a lot about this kind of thing for example, in his essay The Responsibility of Intellectuals.

I think there is quite an opportunity to add Alfred Russel Wallace and others to the list of scientific racists. That would bring the number of discoverers of natural selection to being racist to 2 out of 2. DTMGO (talk) 12:07, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DTMGO. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

– bradv 21:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I request unblock for the following reasons:

My area of interest is a highly controversial subject, that is genocide of indigenous peoples, which involves many nations and many territories throughout history up to the recent present.

I have used two accounts to avoid attracting attention, that is for privacy concerns.

I do not believe that I have practiced any or most of the inappropriate uses of alternative accounts, as I have strived to segregate the participation to separate topics for each account.

I have brought balance, and new content from the point of view of indigenous peoples on a number of subjects, in a number of articles. This problem has been identified in articles such as this>

https://slate.com/technology/2023/02/wikipedia-native-american-history-settler-colonialism.html

My content is heavily referenced with RS supporting directly the topic at hand, and I have engaged in good faith with any scrutiny and editorial revisions.

DTMGO

I'm afraid the overlap casts doubt on your using two accounts for privacy concerns and on separation. To request unblocking, you should first read the WP:GAB, and then follow the instructions in the block notice. Thanks-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra I understand now... what if moving forward I just use one account, and the other one is not used/deleted/blocked ? DTMGO (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]