User talk:Simonm223

You've been lobstered!

Regarding this exchange, and because we haven't found any trout yet this year, I hereby whack you with this lobster. Fill yer boots, bud! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:31, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Pinchy and delicious. (And hey, Mr. Seafood is just down the block.) Simonm223 (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I've been meaning to tell you, it's MR (initials) Seafood, not Mister Seafood. I don't know what the MR is though. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:10, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

And here I've been calling it Mister Seafood like a chump for a year! Simonm223 (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for the kind suggestions. Hope sweet pastry is your thing! :) Ltyl (talk) 16:35, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

A cup of tea to go with you baklava. Thanks for your support in my recent, albeit unsuccessful, RfA. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:55, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Conspiracy theories about Adolf Hitler's death and Pinochet

Thank you for your commentary on Talk:Conspiracy theories about Adolf Hitler's death, I think that really help clarifiying the issue. Now its more clear to me what kind of sources would be needed to make a clear case. Maybe these sources exist, but I won't bring up this topic in a time. I understand rules needs to be harsh on conspiracy theories or else it would be very exposed to promotion.

Regarding the Pinochet article I am unhappy with the first part of "Ideology and public image", it seem to me a collection of straw remarks with no good prose that unifies into a readable narrative. I have myself contributed to it, having added plenty of material in that section but not found any easy way to merge it all into a good text. I also think that if the section is going include selected opinions there should be some sympathetic ones also. Given that you seem interested in the topic but have a different approach on editing I will comment in the talk page before making further changes. Dentren | ^Talk 18:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

With a contentious historical figure like Pinochet, it's always best to discuss first and edit later. This is especially significant considering how he's lionized currently in certain sectors of the far-right. Giving an accurate neutral and scholarly historical account of the dictator is especially relevant. Simonm223 (talk) 18:12, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the Revert.

My apologies for errasing over 140,000 bytes of info in the Yemeni Civil War (2015–present) article. A accident with the spacebar on my keyboard errased all the content of the article.Mr.User200 (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

These things happen. No worries. Simonm223 (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Apologies, of a sort

I don't want my block of 140george (talk · contribs) to appear as if I was preempting your warning. I was convinced they were using article space to work off some frustration and would not stop. Thanks for all your efforts Tiderolls 18:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

No worries. (TBH I'd forgotten you were an admin, and was mostly warning them that I'd be going to AN/I if they continued - your block seemed appropriate.) Simonm223 (talk) 18:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for taking the step of restoring the disputed material to Right-wing populism; it will be interesting to see how long it lasts. I think that I've become something of a personal lightning rod, so I'm inclined not to continue to get involved with the discussions about it. I will, however, monitor them to see if they're any more productive than past discussions have been. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:44, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Not long. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, this attempt to have Wikipedia point out the very real ties between the resurgence of fascism and the rise of right populism is going to have to wait until more of the pro-far-right populist crowd pulls blocks probably. For myself, I'm getting fatigued dealing with this nonsense daily and am trying to step back from Wikipedia a bit. Simonm223 (talk) 13:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

DS warnings

Simonm223, while I understand that the Prager discussion boarders on climate change your warnings posted at my talk page do seem a bit like intimidation. I've hardly touched on the subject. Regardless, your RSN suggestion was good and I think things should go there. Springee (talk) 17:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Nope. My edit was about climate change. I'm arguing PragerU is a fringe source specifically within the context of it being a climate change denialist outlet. The last time you were notified about Climate Change sanctions was in 2016 by HughD. This was purely administrative and there was no intent to intimidate. In fact, if this discussion goes vexatious, I'd have been remiss not to have warned you as you don't have the ds/aware template on your talk page. Simonm223 (talk) 17:24, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Jessica Yaniv

The Human Rights Tribunal was pretty harsh in its decision against her, including a $6,000 fine. They said she weaponized the human rights process as a means of extortion. It's now an important precedent in Canada [1]. I think this warrants more than a couple of sentences in wikipedia. You've been fairly vocal about keeping this out of the project. What are your thoughts now? Mattnad (talk) 22:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't really think we should entertain TERFs using Wikipedia as a platform to weaponize one person's over-reach with a human rights tribunal. Nor did I ask you to reach out to me on this matter. My position on WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS remains the same. Please kindly don't post here again on this topic. Simonm223 (talk) 13:41, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Slipup at arbcom enforcement page

My finger slipped and I clicked archive entirely by accident. I deserve all the trout but I was not intending to edit the page in any way, I certainly wasn't trying to archive an open Arbcom Enforcement case. Oooops. Simonm223 (talk) 17:49, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I left a comment about you edit

I don't know how to mention users so they get notified automatically, so I'm leaving a comment in your talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Call-out_culture#Obama's_view - Sridc (talk) 14:54, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

FYI, I added an intro in my userpage just so you don't have to need to speculate where might come from. I understand that I'm new to editing Wikipedia with its rules, and therefore will be continuing to learn it, but at the same time it feels like I have to fight hard to get even *reasonable* changes included (the Haidt one being a great example). - Sridc (talk) 16:25, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keith Johnston (talk • contribs) 15:59, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Article review request

I've completely revamped the article Police misconduct allegations during the 2019 Hong Kong protests. Can you please take a look at it and remove the NPOV tag if you think it's ok. Thanks. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 07:55, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

You are mentioned

FYI. I mentioned and quoted you here: WP:AN/I#Jamez42's_repeated_block_deletions (permalink) --David Tornheim (talk) 22:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)