User talk:Xenon78: Difference between revisions

Line 64: Line 64:

* If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia’s [[Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents|Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents]].

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia’s [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies and guidelines]], and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|loss of editing privileges]]. Thank you.<!– Template:uw-disruptive2 –> [[User:R0paire-wiki|R0paire]] 01:53, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

[[File:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px|alt=icon]] Please stop your [[Wikipedia:Disruptive editing|disruptive editing]].

* If you are engaged in an article [[Wikipedia:Editing policy|content dispute]] with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the [[:Talk:Great Replacement conspiracy theory|article’s talk page]], and seek [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia’s [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] page, and ask for independent help at one of the [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution#Ask for help at a relevant noticeboard|relevant noticeboards]].

* If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia’s [[Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents|Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents]].

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at [[:Great Replacement conspiracy theory]], you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]. Do not removed [[WP:RS{{!}}sourced]] content; seek [[WP:CON{{!}}consensus]] on talk page if you disagree with the source.<!– Template:uw-disruptive3 –> [[User:R0paire-wiki|R0paire]] 01:57, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Here’s wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Xenon78! I see that you’ve already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

If you have questions, just use this link to ask for help; a volunteer will visit you here shortly!

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Nil🥝 10:10, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Beat me to it! Unfortunate. guninvalid (talk) 10:11, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks’ noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Nil🥝 10:12, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xenon78. Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don’t mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You’ll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily in collaboration.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia’s Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia’s Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It’s best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn’t go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

If you find yourself in a disagreement with another editor, it’s best to discuss the matter on the relevant talk page.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. —Hipal (talk) 18:16, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Phineas and Ferb, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Daniel Case (talk) 21:14, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m RadioactOlive. I noticed that you recently removed content from Great Replacement conspiracy theory without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don’t worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. radioactOlive_(she/it)(talk) 01:46, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The white replacement theory has not been officially debunked, to say it has is to make the article less objective. Please feel free to explain how the theory has been “debunked” if that is what you believe. Xenon78 (talk) 01:49, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the citations on the statement you removed. If you disagree with them, go to the talk page and establish a consensus before removing them. This will likely require finding your own citations, so maybe start there. radioactOlive_(she/it)(talk) 01:55, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Twitter suspensions. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. R0paire 01:53, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.