User talk:ZaBanker

August 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Matthew Cooke (filmmaker), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Largoplazo (talk) 18:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

The person in question accused 'moderate whites' of multiple things. If you replaced 'moderate white' with any other ethnic sub-group the edit would not have been taken down.

Please do not presume to tell total strangers what they would or would not have done under this or that circumstance. (The most flagrant and pathetic examples of this here have involved editors, in response to some edit or comment by me, leaping to accuse gay, Jewish me of having been motivated by homophobia or anti-Semitism.) It does not follow from the existence of bigotry, whether individual or systemic, that every adverse action is the result of it. And read the guidelines on assuming good faith.

I removed your contribution for the reasons I gave. Period. Largoplazo (talk) 20:27, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Besides that, how likely do you think it is that a person with the sort of motivations your accusation implied would be creating articles about Liberian singers, adding achievements and citing sources in articles about Nigerian entertainers, or expanding stub articles about South African community activists and seeking out enough additional sources to establish that they meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion? As far as you know, the sort of thing you posted here, with the comment you made, is just the sort of thing I would post on Twitter. But even things I agree with, and that I might post myself elsewhere, don't necessarily belong here. Largoplazo (talk) 22:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I’m sorry to presume to know you. I used to struggle with same sex attraction when I was in MS/HS.

God will set you free from homosexuality if you ask him to. You don’t have to stay in that life any longer.

No condemnation, just hope. I’m sorry that people have accused you of antisemitism, I’m sure that was painful to hear.

Michael Cooke’s video was extremely disturbing and I see this kind of ideology as hate speech that could lead to a civil war in the near future.

I will do a better job to provide relevant information based on open source articles and leave my personal opinions aside.

Thanks again

-ZaBanker ZaBanker (talk) 02:06, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

"God will set you free from homosexuality if you ask him to" contradicts the experience of thousands, if not millions, who grew up with deep faith in God and believing homosexuality was wrong and realizing they were gay anyway and spending years and years and years asking God to remove it before finally realizing that it didn't work that way. With many of them having been caused great psychological and even physical suffering, even abuse, in the meantime, and many having been driven to attempt suicide, before they finally changed their outlook and accepted how they were. Largoplazo (talk) 02:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

I totally understand, it is a spiritual battle. I know this from personal experience. God is real and Satan is real. Satan is the one that tells people they were born gay and their only hope is suicide.

Just know that God loves you without conditions. His love for you is not tied to your behavior or actions. That alone brings immense freedom.

You can find freedom in his love. Thanks for the feedback ZaBanker (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate your kind intent. However, you need to acknowledge that "God will set you free from homosexuality if you ask him to" is a false absolute. Blaming cases where it fails to be true on Satan doesn't alter its failure to be true. At most "God may set you free from homosexuality if you ask him to" may be a true statement. I am not in a position to say it never happens, but I know for sure it often doesn't, and I know the trade-off for many who've tried it has been profound pain. Please, don't use your religious beliefs to justify making absolute statements that have been flatly contradicted by people's experience. Largoplazo (talk) 13:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

East Market District, Louisville

Your attempt to crowbar in a "Black Lives Matter is bad" angle into East Market District, Louisville fails, in addition to the undue weight or importance" issue, also fails in its sourcing: the WSJ reference is an Opinion column, not a news article; The Daily Wire is a terrible and unreliable cousin of Breitbart News; "Law Enforcement Today" looks like somebody's blog rewriting a Courier-Journal story with extra added snide comments; and the Courier-Journal story you cite is a rewritten press release. from the restauranteur.

Pretty much EVERY contribution you've made on Wikipedia suffers from the same problems, in addition to your attempts to inflate or overstate the importance of minorbthings and to come to your own conclusions instead of relying upon reliable sources. DO BETTER. --Calton | Talk 14:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice

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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

Doug Weller talk 15:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

Doug Weller talk 15:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

General sanctions for Covid-19

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 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions - such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks - 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 these sanctions. 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 15:10, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kentucky, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bourbon. 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) 06:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Trafalgar Square edits

Hi. In addition to what Doug Weller has said above, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. In the specific case of Trafalgar Square, there have been numerous political demonstrations and events over the past 150 years, and to list each one would make the article completely lop sided. However, as an alternative suggestion, you could create List of events at Trafalgar Square, which could be used to accommodate this. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear Ritchie333, I do not understand how "In July 2020, two members of the protest group Animal Rebellion were arrested on suspicion for criminal damage after releasing red dye into the fountains.[87][88]" is allow to remain while an edit about a mass gathering of Tens of Thousands of people is consider superfluous or unimportant. Unite For Freedom was a significant event in terms of public policy in the UK and I do not see why that would not be worthy of being included along with people being arrested for putting red dye in a fountain. Please clarify the difference, thank you

September 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 20:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Could you please clarify what was unrelable? I provided a link to the video of Bill Gates presentation and quoted him directly from the video. I have personally read Killing the Planet and that is where I gained the information on this misinformation. Beside a direct link to a presentation and a direct link to a book, what else would I need to provide? Thanks for the clarification

1. You didn't support the sentence "This belief is based on Gate's 2010 Ted Talk" by a source, the way you wrote would imply Wikipedia gleaned it from the Gates presentation. That is WP:Original research. 2. You again referenced a fellow called Rodney Howard-Browne. Is there any reason we should refer to this individual? Anyone can publish a book, that doesn't mean they're worth mentioning. Do reliable sources mention him? See WP:DUE. 3. Same with "David Cullen with Computing Forever". A random Youtuber? Great. My friends also have a Youtube channel, maybe I should quote them?

This discussion would be more suited for the article's Talk page. Robby.is.on (talk) 19:11, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Help Needed

I need someone to pronounce اوږد in the Wardak dialect [with foucs on ʝ] so I can upload it to the dialects page. Also from the Wardak dialect pronouncing any words with ږ ښ. If you speak any other dialect upload any words with ښ ږ څ ځ ژ. If you upload the file on Wikimedia Commons and post it to my talk page specifying ur dialect - I will add it to the dialects page. Its to raise awareness on Pashto dialects

PashtoAdder4 (talk) 20:59, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy to help, not sure what needs to be done differently, thanks for your feedback

November 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Rodney Howard-Browne, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 17:15, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

After half a year of editing, you still don't seem to understand basic principles of sourcing. Please do read the links about proper sourcing which other editors have left on your Talk page. Robby.is.on (talk) 17:28, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear Robby.is.on, I do not understand how linking the source article to a reference to the article is in any violation of Wikipedia guidelines. Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development is the document that Rodney Howard-Browne was referencing and I believe it is useful to allow readers to check sources for themselves to see if Browne's accusations match up with the actual source material.

Using it as a reference is original research which is not allowed. And other external links should not be added. See Wikipedia:External links. Robby.is.on (talk) 19:42, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: TrustStamp (December 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash was: 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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:TrustStamp and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:TrustStamp, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eagleash (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ZaBanker! 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! Eagleash (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:TrustStamp

Hello, ZaBanker. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:TrustStamp, 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) 01:02, 7 August 2021 (UTC)