User talk:Nihilianth

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Nihilianth! I am CordeliaNaismith and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

CordeliaNaismith (talk) 05:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your fixes to Antarctica-related articles! Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 05:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note! Sorry the cookies made you hungry though, I guess that's the trouble with cyber cookies :-) Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May Day

Hi Nihilianth, I agree with you about the India section on May Day. It's a mess right at the top of the article that badly needs attention. Just a quick note, though, it's generally better to put a "needs editing badly" note like that on the article talk page. Quite a few editors have May Day watchlisted and can give you a hand cleaning the section up. If you have any ideas for sorting the India section out be bold. Hope to see you around the place. :) Ka Faraq Gatri (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Geology_of_Mercury

The first paragraph states in all caps "MERCURY IS FULL OF RAINBOWS AND PONIES." When you go to edit the page, it disappears and there is no way to remove that vandalism. Not sure why.

Nihilianth (talk) 02:38, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OR

Frankly, that entire edit looks like WP:OR. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that this is not a legitimate source demonstrating that population density is a major cause for the spread of viruses? I'm sure there are millions of published sources from across many medical journals that demonstrate this. One source would suffice, even though it is a given fact just like the earth being round is a given fact.

If you have a better way to word it because you don't like the phrase "it should be noted," then please. By all means, make a more appropriate grammatical edit. That's the entire point of Wikipedia. For someone to write an article, and others to come along and improve it with better or more accurate wording. I do insist the main point remain, however. And I will continue reverting it back, if you continue to play semantics. I have no other better way in my mind to phrase it. If you do, that would be great. I'd like to see it worded better and more appropriately. Nihilianth (talk) 16:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:ONUS. It's on you. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources that say population density leads to COVID spread but that do not directly tie it to New York makes it an WP:OR / WP:SYNTH issue. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. It does not. It is about viruses. Not about New York. Viruses do not work differently in New York than it does anywhere else. Just like gravity doesnt work differently in New York than it does anywhere else. The arguemnt is entirely applicable to a section regarding viruses.

I'm beginning to understand this is possibly a right wing suppression of information.

And no. It isnt just on me. It is on YOU as a wiki editor, to help improve information. Not to suppress inforomation. Nihilianth (talk) 17:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Your recent editing history at New York (state) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:52, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So Youre an admin? If so, then you need to quit with the revert war, and help edit the page to improve upon it, if you believe that there could be better words used. It is entirely inappropriate for a moderator to engage in a revert war, without contributing to quality of the edit.

The case for my argument is clear and undisputed. You're the one engaging over semantics. Nihilianth (talk) 17:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to New York (state). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You cited an article published four months prior to first documented case of Covid, to support your conclusions about Covid. Please stop your disruptive editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]