Jump to content

User talk:FatalSubjectivities

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Anti-Plantinga)

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, Anti-Plantinga! 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! Peaceray (talk) 21:37, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anatheism (January 27)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Liance was:
Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Nearly every provided reference is a primary source/self-published, doesn't demonstrate notability.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
-Liancetalk/contribs 15:49, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Anti-Plantinga! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -Liancetalk/contribs 15:49, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anatheism

[edit]

Hello, I noticed this draft that was declined. If independent sources that have significant coverage of the topic cannot be found, a suggestion would be improving the main author's article (Richard Kearney) to add some details about his work. Articles about subtopics that don't independently meet notability requirements (WP:GNG) are usually merged into the most relevant article, this would have the same result. But articles in the draft space also don't immediately vanish unless there's a good reason, they become eligible for WP:G13 after about six months of inactivity. —PaleoNeonate – 16:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Theodicy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agency. 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) 06:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

[edit]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely because the chosen username is a clear violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information).

We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you think there are good reasons why these don't describe your account, or why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Anatheism

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Anti-Plantinga. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Anatheism, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Anatheism

[edit]

Hello, Anti-Plantinga. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Anatheism".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:33, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Kind request to Unblock user

[edit]
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

FatalSubjectivities (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

Request reason:

Old username was not intended to be harmful, defamatory or identity-thieving to any individual. Nonetheless, I will not use old username since it may be inadvertently seen as harmful or libelous. I will instead use a new username. Post-script: I would prefer if my Contributions page is not wiped clean in my unblocking, if it is possible.Anti-Plantinga (talk) 15:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Allowing username change to requested username. Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking. Daniel Case (talk) 07:30, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the blocking administrator, no objections from me. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:43, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Padgriffin. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Elizabeth Stuart (theologian)—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Padgriffin Griffin's Nest 11:11, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

[edit]

Hello, I'm Sea Cow. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, David Bentley Hart, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sea Cow (talk) 03:11, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to David Bentley Hart. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sea Cow (talk) 03:13, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removed my edits. Thanks for reminding me FatalSubjectivities (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

[edit]

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Doug Weller talk 15:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Postchristianity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Revival. 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) 06:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Information icon Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Sunny Side Up. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 10:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About deleting redirects

[edit]

I noticed that you recently tried to {{prod}} the redirect Deconstructionism. Redirects are very cheap, and although there are sometimes good reasons to delete one, what is your reasoning here? There are currently dozens of articles that link to this redirect, such as Immanuel_Kant#Influence_and_legacy for example. If you are successful in removing the redirect, 65 pages will have links that go from blue to red. Are you prepared to resolve the redlink problem by editing all those articles and adding a pipe to the red link, to make them blue again? In general, it's best to do a bit of research first to see how the redirect is being used, before considering it for deletion. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 23:15, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Cyril O'Regan
added a link pointing to David Walsh
Jainism and non-creationism
added a link pointing to Transmigration

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Buzzwords

[edit]

Social constructionism is a standard theory in Sociology, whether one accepts it or not, and should not be tagged with {{buzzword}}, unless you can achieve consensus for it at Talk. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 09:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's precisely my point. I wholeheartedly agree that sociologists can be able to use the standard definition. But the term social construct in many cases is a mere eye-catching MOS:JARGON when WP:PLAINENGLISH could have been used. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 06:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help me with merging Template:Exceptionalism and Template:Ethnocentrism

[edit]

Please help me with with merging Template:Exceptionalism and Template:Ethnocentrism FatalSubjectivities (talk) 17:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While the two topics overlap in a few respects, they are different enough to merit separate templates. What is your reasoning for wanting to merge them? — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 18:17, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As in, the topics page links that are listed inside them. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 06:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think their overlap is very substantial. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Help me with post-WP:MOVE with Bejahung

[edit]


Below is what I see and I cannot do it:


_____________________________________________________


← Nietzschean affirmation

Jump to navigationJump to search

The page "Nietzschean affirmation" (links | edit) has been moved to "Bejahung" (edit | history | links | revert | log) (move log)

Please clean up after your move:

A redirect has been created.

Your move should now be reflected in the Wikidata item language link.

FatalSubjectivities (talk) 17:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FatalSubjectivities (talk) 17:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, Is my IP address revealed? WP:IRCHD says yes, if one uses it. Did I use it? FatalSubjectivities (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pages that link to "Nietzschean affirmation" - Wikipedia FatalSubjectivities (talk) 17:31, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A bot should take care of any dangling redirects to the old name. Check again in a few days to see if anything was missed. Other than that, it doesn't look like anything still remains to be done after the move, but you might want to post your move justification on the talk page in addition to the edit summary. You'll be able to explain more fully that way. I'd have thought a page that has been hanging around since 2007 would have merited a requested moves discussion, but now I guess we'll see if anyone even notices.
I did not see you mention your on-wiki username on IRC; that would be how someone might connect your username and the IP address you were using at the time. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 18:09, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you FatalSubjectivities (talk) 05:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cyril O'Regan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Walsh.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Deletion of redirects

[edit]

I think this could be deleted : Absolute (philosophy - Wikipedia

There is already Absolute (philosophy) - Wikipedia


______

This could too be deleted DeconstructionIsm - Wikipedia

There is already Deconstructionism - Wikipedia

I clicked "(See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)" on WP:RfD but it brings me to the same place. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion - Wikipedia

And I was not allowed to put WP:PROD on redirects to delete them. Hence this-which-I-am-writing-now.

Thanks.

FatalSubjectivities (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFDHOWTO describes how to nominate a page for deletion. Twinkle can also be used to assist in the process. If you want more help, change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}}, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also remember to state your reasons for deleting the redirect. Most redirects exist because someone thought there was a justification for them, such as the missing close paren. I think that reasoning is possibly faulty, but it's incumbent on you to address the original reasoning, not just stand on the mere reasonableness of removing the redirect. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 16:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion

[edit]

I find some of your Edit summaries over-long, epecially those with references. Perhaps keep the ES's short and refer to evidence you put on the Talk pages. David notMD (talk) 15:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted
Tks for informing FatalSubjectivities (talk) 15:02, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, why ought they be short? i want to be able to more easily track my edit histories. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 16:05, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is it because they are taking up wp:weight FatalSubjectivities (talk) 09:47, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sunny Side Up (Singaporean TV series) (January 7)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robertsky was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
For shows that have been broadcasted, please include at least two reviews to sustain the notability of the show. See WP:NFO for other possible evidence of notability.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
– robertsky (talk) 05:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from John Searle into another page. 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. /wiae /tlk 11:47, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will give a go. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 17:08, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many users were involved. WikiBlame (ramselehof.de)
https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=106217729
The version history of <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/John Searle">John Searle</a> is being searched for Derrida as plain text
498 versions found
Derrida was already present in the oldest revision searched dating from <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=692287524">17:51, 24 November 2015</a>.
There are probably older revisions. 500 versions found
Derrida was already present in the oldest revision searched dating from <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=323168974">21:26, 31 October 2009</a>.
There are probably older revisions. 500 versions found
Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=153074897">03:43, 23 August 2007</a> between 250 and 251 while coming from 499:OO

Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=62578579">16:31, 07 July 2006</a> between 374 and 375 while coming from 250:XX

Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=112746961">05:31, 05 March 2007</a> between 312 and 313 while coming from 374:OO

Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=93783645">09:54, 12 December 2006</a> between 343 and 344 while coming from 312:XX

Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=106217729">02:32, 07 February 2007</a> between 327 and 328 while coming from 343:OO

Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=98136444">08:27, 03 January 2007</a> between 335 and 336 while coming from 327:OO

Comparing differences in <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=95426948">01:28, 20 December 2006</a> between 339 and 340 while coming from 335:XO
Insertion found between <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&oldid=95334557">17:07, 19 December 2006</a> and <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&oldid=95426948">01:28, 20 December 2006</a>: <a href="https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=John_Searle&diff=prev&oldid=95426948">here</a>
<a href="http://wikipedia.ramselehof.de/wikiblame.php?project=wikipedia&article=John+Searle&needle=Derrida&lang=en&limit=500&offjahr=2006&offmon=12&offtag=20&offhour=01&offmin=28&searchmethod=int&order=desc&force_wikitags=off&user_lang=en">[Search from here]</a>
Execution time: 8 seconds

http://wikipedia.ramselehof.de/wikiblame.php?project=wikipedia&article=John+Searle&needle=Derrida&lang=en&limit=500&offjahr=2023&offmon=2&offtag=10&offhour=23&offmin=55&searchmethod=int&order=desc&force_wikitags=off&user_lang=en&ignorefirst=0 FatalSubjectivities (talk) 18:31, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Milbank–Žižek debates (February 18)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by HitroMilanese were:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Not sure what the draft creator wants to do here. Please see WP:YFA.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Hitro talk 06:32, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manualism in moral theology (March 13)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GoingBatty was:
SEVENTEEN citations for one sentence is citation overkill. Please add more content from the sources and/or remove excessive citations. Thanks!
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
GoingBatty (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Manualism in moral theology has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Manualism in moral theology. Thanks! —Caorongjin 💬 20:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Using the talk page for the Meta-historical fall article

[edit]

Thank you for your continued input with the Meta-historical_fall article, and please note the two most recent comments on the article talk page in relation to your additions:

I'd like to review most additions together on the talk page as the length and sprawling nature of this article has been a serious concern in the past, and I do not want it to grow to be a concern again. --Jjhake (talk) 13:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Male and Female He Created Them

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Male and Female He Created Them, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manualism in moral theology (April 26)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mattdaviesfsic was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
So... what actually is it? May be better to merge it somewhere else if it cannot justify a standalone article. Needs more explanation of what it actually is (not fixed from the last review it seems), and what people think about it.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 06:53, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent PROD at Applied postmodernism

[edit]

Just wanted to let you know that I have removed the PROD tag you placed on the redirect Applied postmodernism - that tag is not applicable to redirects. I also notice that your reason provided was a notability concern, please note that notability is not an issue with redirects, which are only designed to guide readers to a more suitable location anyway (often, non-notable articles are converted to redirects, as well). If you're still looking for the page to be deleted, please list a new discussion at WP:RFD. Thanks! Tollens (talk) 09:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

[edit]

Information icon Hi FatalSubjectivities! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at The Onion that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. — Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 06:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Category:Christian continental philosophers and theologians

[edit]

The page Category:Christian continental philosophers and theologians has been deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. As the page met any of these strictly-defined criteria, it was deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been deleted are:

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. Liz Read! Talk! 22:18, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Reification (Marxism)

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Reification (Marxism), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:01, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Milbank–Žižek debates

[edit]

Information icon Hello, FatalSubjectivities. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Milbank–Žižek debates, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Milbank–Žižek debates

[edit]

Hello, FatalSubjectivities. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Milbank–Žižek debates".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 16:19, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

wrong hatnote

[edit]

you shouldn't be using this template. 204.209.132.57 (talk) 19:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Manualism in moral theology

[edit]

Hello, FatalSubjectivities. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Manualism in moral theology".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 01:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

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) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article reorganisation proposal for Pope Francis and LGBT topics

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Talk:Pope Francis and LGBT topics regarding a reorganisation of the article. The thread is Article reorganisation proposal. Thank you.

I am seeking consensus for a significant reorganisation of the article. I would be grateful for your comments, as an experienced editor who has contributed to this article before. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 14:23, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

?

[edit]

I genuinely do not see a pun. DS (talk) 02:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposals

[edit]

I note that with this edit, adding a merge proposal, you missed a few steps that would be really helpful for those considering merge proposals:

  • The reason should go on the discussion page of a target, not in the template (even though this is technically feasible)
  • You have not indicated a direction in the template, but this should be included wherever possible
  • You have not tagged the other page

Adding these steps ensure that the relevant readerships see the proposal and understand exactly what is expected, while provign a forum for discussion. See WP:MERGEPROP for more details or rationale. Klbrain (talk) 10:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bayard Rustin and AIDS

[edit]

hello, user:FatalSubjectivities: You made an edit to Bayard Rustin that properly noted a drafting error, but the change you made still leaves that sentence and the following sentence grammatically confused (verb tense, inter alia). More important, it is unclear whether those sentences are intended to be supported by the next footnote, attached to a direct quotation which is another separate sentence. Can you check that source and clarify? In particular, was it intended to say he became "an advocate for people with AIDS," as you phrased it? Or that he became an advocate for increased funding for AIDS research, perhaps? Or an advocate against discrimination targeting individuals who were HIV-positive? Or something else? The original wording that you changed might have been intended to mean any of those. Please clarify, and cite the source that supports you. And perhaps straighten out those two sentences in general, if you can. PDGPA (talk) 18:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out. The word advocate can mean proponent, or mean "someone who speaks for, supports, or represents a person or group of people who may need extra help or protection". Hence, in my opinion, the grammar of the current revision for that sentence in the Rustin page is acceptable.
(On the contrary, "AIDS" is not a group of people - previously, when the page stated that he "advocated for AIDS", the only comprehensible and grammatically correct meaning - 'support" - is silly. )
I admit that I did not read any original source.
FatalSubjectivities (talk) 07:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khaled Abou El Fadl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestine.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embedded anchors in section headings

[edit]

Hi, FatalSubjectivities, and thanks for your contributions. I noticed several edits in which you renamed section headings, which is fine, and I see you tried to comply with the spirit of MOS:SECTIONHEADER by adding an anchor to the heading, so that inlinks, if any, would still work. Unfortunately, the *routine* addition of embedded anchors is neither necessary, nor desirable, as it creates a complex section heading that many editors don't know how to handle. In addition, there usually aren't any inlinks, so the anchor is not needed. Finally, Adding a bare, unsubsted anchor (i.e., in the format {{anchor|Foo}} ) also obfuscates the edit summary in the history.

Adding a properly formatted anchor can be useful so that incoming links will still work after a heading name change, but this is best used when "there are many links to the old title". When there are none, an anchor is unnecessary, and when there are just a couple, it's best to adjust the links in other articles to the new section name, rather than embed an anchor in the target article heading. Finally, when there are so many incoming links that it would be too time-consuming to fix them all, then please use the {{subst:anchor}} or <span id=...> style recommended at MOS:SECTIONANCHOR, and not {{anchor|Foo}} format, which causes the "undesirable behavior" that you can read about at the guideline.

I have removed unneeded embedded anchors from Ek Villain, PDF, Qiyas, General semantics, Iranian reformists, Sufi metaphysics, John Milbank, Salafi movement, Gilles Deleuze, and Friedrich Nietzsche's views on women either because they had no incoming links from other articles, or if they did, after adjusting the inlinks (there was one article with a section link to an anchor at General semantics; it was adjusted to the new section name).

While embedded section anchors have their uses, please don't add them willy-nilly, and most of all, please avoid adding them when there are no incoming links to it at all. There is an explanatory note at MOS:#Section headings that explains how to find out if a given article section has any inlinks or not; you can find the note here, or just execute this advanced search, and change article to the name of the article, and oldsection to the old section title. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Will adopt new practices.
I Now know really how advanced the advanced search is. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 08:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FatalSubjectivities&oldid=1245356645"