User talk:Bongolian/Archive3

Many thanks...
...for your adding links to Unplanned. You're quite helpful with pages that aren't "yours". I've been trying similarly to contribute to the alt-right glosssary, and hope that this has been of use. CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 13:59, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, . I try to read and edit every new mainspace page. It's a good exercise in keeping up with what's on RW and for broadening one's knowledge. Bongolian (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Can you supplement the document?
Joshua Wong. This man is risking his life for the freedom of Hong Kong citizens. If you know anything, I want you to contribute! --BluePink (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know a lot about him, but I made some edits to the page. Bongolian (talk) 16:31, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Can't you squeeze this video in?
It's my favourite part of the film but I see that it comes in the middle of one of your sections. Spud (talk) 05:45, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Added by popular demand. Bongolian (talk) 06:36, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's great. Spud (talk) 12:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Parody article likely written by Emil Kirkegaard
Cambridge University Press was created by a suspicious account and contains many false statements, e.g.

"The Handbook of Intelligence (2000) edited by Robert J. Sternberg — Beats around the bush about race and IQ, but openly advocates the discredited link between human brain size and intelligence, complete with a citation to white nationalist J. Philippe Rushton."

"Human Intelligence (2011) by Earl Hunt — Advocacy of hereditarianism, racialism, and brain size / IQ correlation; cites The Bell Curve for some of its data."

These statements are false and incredibly misleading, for example Hunt's book doesn't advocate hereditarianism or racialism and he criticises the former. Additionally, Cambridge University Press is described as a "garbage publisher" which is obviously nonsense, while Journal of Biosocial Science is described as a pseudojournal when it obviously isn't - it's a mainstream peer-reviewed journal.

The current article is now being spammed across twitter by Kirkegaard and his friends from OpenPsych as a method to discredit RationalWiki. WatchMaker (talk) 17:27, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , What's your evidence that it's being spammed around? Rindermann's book was mostly favorably reviewed by Kirkegaard, for example. Bongolian (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * https://twitter.com/a_centrism/status/1187972899438759936
 * https://twitter.com/NoahCarl90/status/1142492836023218177
 * https://twitter.com/nathancofnas/status/1176850475179597824
 * https://twitter.com/NSesardic/status/1073204849561485312
 * https://twitter.com/nathancofnas/status/1177298961121497088
 * WatchMaker (talk) 21:05, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * None of those people are Kirkgaard. 21:13, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * What I really find amusing is that even after a year of being absent, I still see random accounts being registered for the sole purpose of making edits about Kirkegaard. Like seriously, the guy isn't very well known or notable. 21:18, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's pretty sad, really. 21:27, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The wording on "garbage publisher" should probably be changed to "publisher of garbage", but otherwise I haven't seen a problem with the page yet. Bongolian (talk) 18:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Do you like Park Geun-hye?
Do you want the former President Park Geun-hye to be released?Do you support Park Geun-hye?Or is it FUCK?

박근혜 전 대통령이 석방되길 원하세요?박근혜를 지지해?아니면 씨발? &mdash; Unsigned, by: Karasawa Takahiro / talk / contribs
 * Draft:Park Geun-hye is a stub with no citations. You need to do more work on the pages that you create. That's why I keep moving them to draft space. Bongolian (talk) 17:53, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 moderator nomination
-- Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 01:17, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Ace using gendered epithets (above) against Oxyeana
Completely out of error, not purposely. Acei9 12:04, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * What I mean to say is I don't use epithets against Oxy. Sometimes I am editing on the fly on my phone and I accidentally type he instead of she. I just wanted to clear that up. Acei9 00:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Why does this keep coming up? You already said it was an ordinary error. At least you could shut up about it.Ariel31459 (talk) 01:12, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't bring it up - it was mentioned specifically on the campaigning page only a day or two ago so I want to make sure people don't think I am doing it to purposely offend someone else. But fine, I've said my bit. I'll go back to what I was doing (drinking at my desk pretending to work) Acei9 01:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Your help is required
To avoid getting into a fight with Oxy again I’m asking a third party to step in. Oxy keeps reverting these edits but there is nothing to state BoNs can’t endorse people. I think she’s doing it because the BoN didn’t endorse her. Either way - there is nothing in our guidelines that say the edits should be reverted. Again - I’m trying to do the adult thing here to avoid escalating another pointless fight with Oxy. Acei9 16:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I know we don’t let BoNs vote which is god but Oxy is making up rules for the Mod Elections on the fly - any rules regarding who can endorse for mod shouldn’t be decided by one person on a whim. Acei9 16:45, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * BoN endorsements are ridiculous on their face. I am perhaps not the best person to try to intervene on this since I was anti-endorsed by the same BoN. Perhaps or, who were both endorsed by the BoN, would care say something about this? Bongolian (talk) 17:59, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Ridiculous or not there’s nothing to say they can’t make them. Acei9 18:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Are there archives from previous endorsements for mod anywhere? Acei9 18:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * A BoN endorsement is fairly pointless since they can’t vote. Then again, I’ve seen BoN’s participate in previous RW elections and nobody has said anything so I don’t know. --RWRW (talk) 18:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Looking into it, BoN 141.134.75.236 made several contributions to last years election and a couple of BoN’s endorsed/anti-endorsed in the most recent RMF election--RWRW (talk) 18:19, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * In that case I’m reverting them back - it violates none of our standards plus there is precedent. Acei9 18:55, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * And in case anyone queries it - it isn't because it is Oxy, it is because no one person decides which comments stay and which don't on the fly. Acei9 18:58, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

I concur. Being anti-endorsed by a BoN is a badge of honor of sorts. If anyone wants to prevent this behavior in future elections, they should put it up for a vote. Bongolian (talk) 19:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah good. I'm glad this got settled with another shit-fight. Acei9 19:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Boogaloo
From memory, you were inquiring about the context of this term re the alt-right glossary. Some info here. CogitoNotStirred (via telepathy) (talk) 21:57, 26 November 2019 (UTC)


 * It was also a kind of a dance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjwTJsAHkDg
 * Oh dear...Ariel31459 (talk) 22:06, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, also a breakdance film, but the alt-right derivation is certainly derived from the shooter video game. Bongolian (talk) 22:14, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Ace
I`m tired of Ace's shit, can you do something please? — Oxyaena Harass  01:56, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * While, I do not agree with all of Ace's views on blocking, I actually agreed with Ace on the unblocking of Bon 46.7.28.113. That single edit made by that person was trivial and not deserving of any block. If you think your disputes with Ace are Coop-worthy, you certainly do have that option. If you're specifically wanting moderator help for this, it might be better to try to wait till after the elections, whose results should hopefully be announced shortly. Bongolian (talk) 02:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know why Oxy freaks out as soon as I do anything he disagrees with. I'm following the community standards and every time I do I get jumped on. If Oxy has an issue with me he can address me either at the coop, on my talkpage or bring it to the attention of the mods. All I am doing is following the comm standards. Oxy blocks with invalid reason. He blocked for "page blanking" on what was a single edit then locked the page - after one edit. Oxy - would you please stop following me around and use the coop. AceMcWicked 02:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ace that the block was excessive for Jaydogg1994. You could have given Jaydogg1994 a short-term block for edit warring, but page blanking: I don't think so. Jaydogg1994 is an autoconfirmed/non-sysop vs. a BoN, so who cares. I don't see how universal healthcare is inherently 'correct', which is what this issue rests upon. Bongolian (talk) 02:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, Ace try to make an effort to use a person's preferred pronouns. It's just a matter of basic civility. Anyone can be guilty of using the wrong pronoun by mistake occasionally, but it's quite clear that you're doing this on purpose from your use of gendered insults during the moderator elections. Bongolian (talk) 02:21, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I’m not doing it on purpose. You’ll see elsewhere I use the correct pronoun. I’m not deliberately trying to offend anyone. AceMcWicked 05:24, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Also I never used a “gendered insult”. That’s bullshit. I get it wrong but never do it on purpose. I’m sorry that I do it, I don’t like to get it wrong. So fuck off with that. AceMcWicked 05:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * All I am doing is unblocking people that shouldn't have been blocked. I am not on Oxy's case because it's Oxy - she just happens to make the most invalid blocks. But I am happy to be brought before the mob if she wants to Coop me. AceMcWicked 02:25, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

People who are against universal healthcare are heartless. — Oxyaena Harass  10:40, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Nice straw man. 2607:FB90:9034:8375:0:E:A1D2:D901 (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Sending people into bankruptcy because of extortionate prices over life-saving treatments or outright dying because of that lack of access to healthcare, yeah, that meets the textbook definition of heartlessness, you fool. — Oxyaena Harass  14:24, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * very relevant im sure EK (talk) 15:16, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's play devil's advocate here. You think Trump is a fascist, racist, and all around jerk, right? You want Donald Trump to have a monopoly on healthcare, and the ability to use that monopoly to deny healthcare to black people and Hispanics? Would you want fundamentalist Christians who would be inclined to eliminate funding for hormone treatments and surgical procedures for transgenders to have a monopoly on our healthcare? Eat your own words, fool. Again, nice straw man with literally no relevance to this conversation. (And seriously, don't you have anything other than name calling to contribute to this wiki?) 73.55.100.94 (talk) 16:51, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Ariel31459 (talk) 17:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * We have an article on Universal Healthcare which hasn't been edited or talked about since last December. If you want to do some actual work that would be a good place to start. @ Bongolian, what is with this pronoun complaint? I haven't noticed any intentional gender-related hostility from anyone. Ariel31459 (talk) 17:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Why not try stop projecting, Morris. I rebutted your statement it was a "strawman," what you have said is completely irrelevant to this conversation, and you are the one name calling, not I. What happened to loving one's neighbor as one's self, Morris, it's not very Christian of you to "eliminate funding for hormone treatments and surgical treatment for transgenders (sic)." — Oxyaena Harass  17:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This Morris? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCja1WGZx-E&pbjreload=10 Ariel31459 (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, you got me. That's funny, I'll stop feeding the troll. — Oxyaena Harass  20:24, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

I need help
How do you move a draft into the mainspace? — Jeh2ow Damn son!  23:26, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I've moved the page to mainspace for you. One needs to be a Sysop to do that, but don't fret, you'll probably get Sysop status very shortly. Bongolian (talk) 23:39, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks — Jeh2ow Damn son!  23:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

OK it works
Thanks.--ParkerPeter (talk) 08:47, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

My draft was deleted again
Sorry to bother you again, but I logged in to continued my draft an I saw that Oxyena deleted it again:

13:20, 7 December 2019 Oxyaena (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Not real communism (Hopelessly tiny stub)

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Log/delete

I understand my draft is short, but how am I supposed to make it longer if it keeps getting deleted? I don't have much time at hand, and I'd like to work on it in my spare time. It might takes weeks until it is finished. Isn't that the purpose of drafts?

By the way, I cannot post neither in Ace McWicked's page nor in https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki_talk:All_things_in_moderation I don't know why.

--ParkerPeter (talk) 15:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I've already pointed out why your "draft" is shit. Do I need to go over them again? — Oxyaena Harass  16:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * A moderator explicitly told you to not delete a draft because you disagree with it https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki_talk:All_things_in_moderation&diff=2139955&oldid=2139940 --ParkerPeter (talk) 07:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , CheeseburgerFace moved your page here: User:ParkerPeter/Not real communism. You can work on it there until it's in better shape. Bongolian (talk) 08:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Ban
G'day Bongolian, I can see you are the only moderator active at the minute and since I can't post to the Moderator Noticeboard talk page I was wondering if you could go ahead and urban me (Tdog1). I'm happy to confirm that when I drifted away from the wiki around 16/17 I was in good standing and nothing has changed since. In fact I've served in a few official capacities around here. Tdog1 120.16.137.92 (talk) 09:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Urban and unban, the dangers of mobile editing. 120.16.137.92 (talk) 09:20, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You'll no doubt be overjoyed to hear of my triumphant return. No action required. Tdog1 (talk) 09:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Banned again. This is farcical. I guess I'll try one more time, and again since I can't comment on any of the supposed official channels and you seem active as a moderator can you unban me and give whoever it is repeatedly banning me a gentle reminder of expectations around use of their mop? 120.16.204.212 (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * lmao EK (talk) 23:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yawn. Find something better to do with your life, 120.16.204.212/Morris/Florida Man or whoever you are. Bongolian (talk) 00:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Grawp accounts
Are all of those Grawp accounts from Morris? Because I found Grawp4 & Grawp5 after changing the number of Grawp3.

Sidenote: Is "Grawp" even a word? I have a suspicion of what it could mean (more or less a dialect for another word...)... Tinribmancer (talk) 09:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Harry Potter reference. 09:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter because the main Grawp was permabanned for its own reasons. Bongolian (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * the real grawp is passed so ye it's all Morris. EK (talk) 23:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Sysops criteria
I am wondering if you have any definite criteria for awarding sysop privileges to new users. One person that you recently gave sysop rights had been on the wiki two days and created one stub of an article that I'm sure took at least ten minutes of their time. Is this then sufficient? Ariel31459 (talk) 16:57, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , I was probably too hasty in that case. There are really no strict criteria for this, but in the case of recently Sysopped people who seem undeserving or who misbehave, it is allowed for a longer-established Sysop to remove the Sysop rights for the newbie without going through the coop. -Bongolian (talk) 18:14, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to apologize for messing up Bongolian's edits to the Adolph Hitler article. I swear, all I did was add spaces between some elided words - at least, that's how it looked on my screen. I didn't mean to make any kind of large-scale change. I wonder what really happened under the hood. Dave Wise 2 (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , just make some reasonable, non-trivial edits for a few days and you'll probably get your Sysop privileges back. Bongolian (talk) 23:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , will do. Dave Wise 2 (talk) 23:35, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Question
Can anyone (BoN's & passerby's) check our mod noticeboard? Tinribmancer (talk) 23:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, most of RW is open for inspection. One exception is the autoblock criteria. Bongolian (talk) 00:57, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Public School Girl
Is sysoprevoke based on family relationship a thing now? EK (talk) 08:23, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No, but the history of their working in tandem and her doing his bidding. Bongolian (talk) 08:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * makes you a little nervous don't it? NotMuchTime (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * ye kinda does ngl, certainly its not a precedent i like. EK (talk) 12:37, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  14:52, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I undid it. Bongolian (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Also, consider that she LANCBed (then returned of course) so it's really no big deal. Bongolian (talk) 18:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I really don't see a problem with Sysoprevoking her. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  18:57, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * im not suggesting ever making this person a sysop - i just don't see how they have done anything that would deserve sysoprevoke - something that is generally only applied after a coop case involving sysop tool abuse. EK (talk) 20:35, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Debating Sysoprevoke is a bit pointless at the moment given that PBS is permanently blocked. I get the "agent of Morris" and possibly "shit-stirring" accusations, but I don't see where the "voter fraud" accusation comes from. Also the "no edits actually adding anything useful" accusation seems oddly familiar...... Maybe has some thoughts. --RWRW (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The voter fraud accusation comes from this edit she made where she attempted to re-add her vote which was previously stricken by Bongo in defiance of policy. Also note that she can basically be considered a sockpuppet of a banned user (Morris) and constantly attempts to interfere on his behalf. 21:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Fairs, I thought it was a reference to the recent Mod election. --RWRW (talk) 14:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

PSG absolutely deserves Sysoprevoke, but I'm not going to pursue it because it's not worth the drama. People who have lost Sysop, who have made minimal useful contributions, and who are drama queens do not deserve the benefit of the doubt or a coop case to stir up more drama. I'm not going to pursue this because it's not worth the effort. Coop cases should be reserved for people who have made actual useful contributions. Bongolian (talk) 03:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I thought sysoprevoke was reserved to abuse of sysop tools exclusively? AceModerator 04:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , where does it say that? It's not here: RationalWiki:Sysoprevoke. Bongolian (talk) 04:25, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I don’t know - it was just what I thought which is why I asked. AceModerator 05:25, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * is a pretty blatant troll, even by just the name. Most of their "edits" are just vandalism reversions.
 * On a more pressing issue, it seems like Morris signed up for the wiki, with a username that appears to be a threat, . 05:55, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * it is a threat, against me as u can see by his edit. The premise is that if sysoprevoke can be handed out unilaterally for affiliations to banned users then anyone with significant contact or relationships with banned users is at risk of being themselves affected. EK (talk) 10:24, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

As I have said before, PSG's punishments were not for her affiliation, but for her behavior. We did make her Sysop and welcomed her to continue (productive) editing even after the initial demopping. Bongolian (talk) 17:07, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * ok thanks. EK (talk) 19:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Reverted edits
Hi. Could I ask you why you have reverted these edits (e.g. which policy I've violated)? Perhaps you could provide a description in your revert edit to assist in understanding your motivations? Quitting Religion (talk) 08:16, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I was too hasty, and I've undone my reversion, . I don't get the "And they're off!" comment though. Bongolian (talk) 08:24, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries. The "And they're off!" comment is in relation to the "fact" that the verse is the first time in the book that mentions that the Israelites were setting off on the way to the promised land ("then after that the children of Israel journeyed"). Total bollocks of course, but I think that people look in the notes column of these pages for events. Happy to remove any comments if they don't find favour after discussion on the talk pages. Cheers. Quitting Religion (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Ideologically motivated blocking
I have been faced with multiple unannounced and unexplained blocks based on vague accusations of whitewashing, (providing more detail on the relationship between Catholicism and the Right during the first half of the twentieth century by using recognized historical sources), it seems as though I am being censored for providing info that doesn`t agree with the ideology of many of the editors, but I have consistently remained neutral, provided sources and stayed polite. I had hoped rationalwiki would encourage constructive dialogue not censorship of those who mention that Pope Pius XII supported Claus von Stauffenberg. Is it whitewashing to reject the claim that Pius XII was a Fascist? Or to note the distinction between Integralism and Fascism? Does one need to support the myth pushed by the KGB that Conservative Catholicism=Fascism in order to not be banned for whitewashing? I had read that rationalwiki does not have ideological bans and I also read I could alert sysops so I thought I would do so. JohnLogan (talk) 14:00, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Instead of bothering an individual moderator, I suggest you take your issues to the moderator noticeboard. Thanks, Cosmikdebris (talk) 15:40, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Content Reversal
Why was my quote at the Anarchism page reversed? The quote by Alan Moore is much more famous than the one from Thomas Hoobe, and is much more direct to the point than his, who is filled with bias since Hoobes is a well-know absolutist with a very outdated view on anarchism, that not only misses the entire point on anarchism but also sees it as a state of "pure chaos", which anarchism isn't. --TheOne (talk) 23:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , I've heard of the Hobbes quote, but not the Moore quote. Also, the Hobbes quote had a citation, but the Moore quote did not. You can add the Moore quote with a citation, or if you want the the Hobbes quote removed, you can argue for its removal on the talk page. Bongolian (talk) 23:54, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi
I wrote this and it's now finished as a draft: Draft:A New Radical Centrism could you move this to A New Radical Centrism? Job (talk) 20:21, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. Bongolian (talk) 20:48, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Bug in the Banned template
There was an errant  in the  template that was causing the categories at the bottom of the page to be displayed in large typeface. I got rid of the offending tag in the template, and it seems to be fine now. Cosmikdebris (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing it! Bongolian (talk) 04:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for your edits on Conflict of interest! It's definitely an improvement. Luna Rose I'm shy; say hi 15:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, . I appreciate your edits on RW! Bongolian (talk) 17:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

My apologies
I uh am sorry for my rudeness earlier, I was irritable and that was uncalled for, but Bernie being a Russian asset.... come on, seriously? — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  23:25, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There's really no need to apologize for anything, . I respect that you have different opinions than I do, I really do. With regard to Bernie, there's really no doubt that he at least falls into the unwitting asset category. Both the Mueller Report and the current State Department have confirmed this, so you'd have to be in denial about both of them to think otherwise. If nothing else, the support likely comes from bots, trolls, and disinformation originating from Russia. Unwitting assets are a normal part of tradecraft (see ), and there's a recently-revealed case of a large-scale CIA espionage operation, which employed people who did not know that they were employed by a CIA front company, and consequently put some of the employees' lives in danger without their knowledge. Bongolian (talk) 23:47, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean, you have to look at the pros and cons here. Bernie's pros far outweigh his cons imo, the one thing I really take him to task for is the fact he's a zionist. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  12:33, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * For me, there is no pro that is going to outweigh Bernie's being a Russian asset. Bernie's so-called pros are paper-thin in the form of policies, not actions anyway. Bongolian (talk) 19:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Privately
At least, as privately as you can manage on a wiki. Fuck you. That saloon bar shit is seriously dishonest.

The context of your deep up your rectum googling makes it crystal goddamn clear that term was not being used synonymously with being gay, nor as a slur.

The fact that you're going to such lengths to smear someone dishonestly like this just fills me with contempt.

Where's your integrity? Why would you waste so much time and effort on something where you're so totally in the wrong? It's a shitty thing to do. A real goddamn shitty thing to do. I know we're arguing on the internet and all, but at some level, I'm deeply disappointed how far you'll go. It's awful. And it reflects badly on your character. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't call Oxy a homophobe. I said that "it's homophobic", meaning the term 'buttchug'. I'm fully aware that making a single bigoted remark does not make one a bigot. I said that Oxy used an ad hominem on Buttigieg: that much is true. I've seen these types of 'butt' references to Buttigieg on Nazi Twitter, so it's something that they are exploiting, very likely as homophobia. I actually came across that University of Tennessee story back in May when I was writing the fraternity page (I did not use it on the page though), so it wasn't something new to me. Perhaps we can both accept that 'buttchug' can sometimes be homophobic depending on intentions?
 * You called me dumb in your initial response, and this was not the first time you've done this. I can accept when I'm wrong, but saying things like that doesn't help discourse. Bongolian (talk) 20:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It was pretty goddamn dumb to post. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 21:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Imo, making fun of a person for having "butt" in the name is a 6 year old playground tease. I wouldn't go far to say it's anything inherently homophobic. 21:08, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's true. I'd never do it myself, except inasmuch as I say things like "butt" and "klobb" out of laziness.  ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 21:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If I had to make fun of Buttigieg, I'd call him "the butt man", but again, not out of malice, just to amuse myself. Kinda like changing words in movie/book/video game titles to "ass" and see which results make me laugh (and they usually do because I'm like 9 years old sometimes). 21:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Libertarian paradise
Guess you didn't like that edit? (Help, help, I'm being oppressed by statists! Come quickly! Come see the violence inherent in the system!) -47.146.63.87 (talk) 23:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Snark is like table salt. A little bit adds flavor and depth but too much ruins everything. 00:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Civility Policy
I admit, I am kind of coming around to the idea of a more formalized civility policy. What would you have in mind? RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Considering the amount of abuse I get thrown my way I`m cautiously in favor of it, but formulate it in such a way that does not allow for tone trolling, sealioning, or general bad faith argumentation. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  18:31, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I actually don't have anything very specific in mind. Before the original fracas, I was originally thinking of a mainspace page on civility, but then I started wondering missional-or-not and shelved the idea. We could start such a page, which might be less controversial than an immediate policy change, and then try to push policy towards agreement with such a page. Bongolian (talk) 18:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I attempted one, then that got shot down, iirc. 19:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you brought up the idea of a direct policy change within the Saloon. What do you think of my idea of mainspace page first, then trying to push for (modest) policy changes? Bongolian (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, JDSalamander here
I did not mean to appear as a troll, just adding some humour to articles. I was also the one who updated the Alex Jones page. I live in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. I appreciate the message you're sending, and I hate misinformation and conspiracy theories as much as y'all do.
 * That's fine. It just seemed like snark in the wrong places to me. Keep at it and you might get into the swing of things around here. Bongolian (talk) 17:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

2020 election and voter suppression
What do you mean by "Can you come up with a better citation if you're going to make that voter suppression claim?". There's at least three sources in WIGO elections and more can be easily found in a five minutes search in Google. Or are you denying there was voter supression? I mean the democratic establishment made no ilusions about it's opposition to Bernie Sanders and what can you call the Dems allowing primaries to go on (and threatening to punish states that postponed primaries) during a pandemic other than voter suppression? It's just what it is. The fact that polling status were massively reduced and that people had to wait hours and hours to vote is nothing more than voter suppression, to try to claim otherwise is just delusion.Tuxer (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to deny anything. I just didn't think that was a very good citation . If you have a news article rather than a blog post, it would be an improvement. Bongolian (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry for coming off a bit agressive. I will add the sources later.Tuxer (talk) 01:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. Bongolian (talk) 02:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Article on Hofstedter book
I have written about 3,000 words on Draft:Anti-intellectualism in American Life. It is essentially an outline of the author's introductory chapters. I am not sure how to properly format this kind of article. The general nature of anti-intellectualism, at least the variety most familiar in America, might be instructive to some of our readers. Perhaps you could take a look at it on one of these lonely days ahead. Criticism would be appreciated.Ariel31459 (talk) 03:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's probably fine content-wise, so I'll move it into mainspace and begin editing. Bongolian (talk) 04:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This is a good draft and is ready for mainspace. I'll be happy to review and refine. Cosmikdebris (talk) 04:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Good deal. Thanks to both of you.Ariel31459 (talk) 04:29, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm taking a break from editing for at least a couple hours if you want to continue. Bongolian (talk) 05:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes. All help is appreciated, refining the article. Also, we still need to add more on the topic of evangelism. At the moment I am still reading. Ariel31459 (talk) 20:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

About that block
I think the BoN's comments were meant to be sarcastic, claiming this is what goes through the minds of prominent conservatives like Rupert Murdoch. Did you by chances look at the last sentence in the post, or the BoN's talk page(which they just made) or perhaps their user history(they tend to make sarcastic statements like this)? Was the block really called for? A verbal warning might have sufficed.-Flandres (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft redirects
Thanks for removing the redirect from draft of Logan Robertson. There is also a redirect from draft:Joseph Sciambra which redirects to the main page. Is removing draft redirects something I can do in future? Debunky (talk) 22:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I deleted the redirect from the draft version of Joseph Sciambra. Cosmikdebris (talk) 23:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, Sysops like yourself have the power to delete pages. Also, at the time that one moves a page to mainspace, one has the option of not creating a redirect. Bongolian (talk) 01:10, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks I didn't see that feature. I will not include redirects in future. Debunky (talk) 01:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Article deleted for no reason?
Hi,

The article you worked on has been deleted randomly with no vote to deletion, see (redacted).

Problematically, the editor who created the page has also been banned on dubious allegations of being a banned editor (no evidence though was presented for this.) I suggest monitoring EK's erratic behaviour and abuse of moderation. Tephra (talk) 22:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Please restore the page for at least a vote to delete discussion. The claim by EK the article "doxxed" (redacted) is also dubious. Tephra (talk) 22:05, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


 * EK is retracting my edits for no valid reason. There's no dox:


 * Ek's dubious argument is (-) article doxed him, but but he identifies his Wikipedia account with his real name on various Wikipedia related blogs and forums:

(comment removed)


 * I don't use discord, the deletion was "per discord". There is no doxing here. Perhaps a mistake has been made. John66 (talk) 00:11, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not on Discord either., Can you still justify the page deletion in light of the above quotation & link? Of the moderators only and  are acknowledged to be on Discord, though RWRW seems to be asleep at the wheel of late. Bongolian (talk) 00:32, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Asleep at the wheel? I was just resting my eyes officer!
 * There's been no discussion about it on Discord that I've seen. And certainly none that I've been a part of. --RWRW (talk) 01:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * there is relevant disscussion on the Treehouse and wp chat as I no longer use the public ratwiki discord. EK (talk) 01:13, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Please move all further discussion of this topic to here: RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation Bongolian (talk) 01:15, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm on Discord, but I didn't see any rationaliwki related discussion on our server (or at least in the appropriate channels) or in the cobb server (which is a server we link to alongside the official server if I recall correctly). 01:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

HELP!!!!!
Hi, sorry for the overdramatism, please could I have some help @ Draft:Politic-Ed???--Barca119 (talk) 18:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about the site. You could ask for help in Saloon to see if anyone is familiar with it or interested in it. Bongolian (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I was more asking about what needs verifying with references, so that the draft can become an article. Is there anything that does need verifying in your eyes, or can I move it to being an article? Thanks :) --Barca119 (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It looks like you had reasonable references before you erased it. The problem was probably that you hadn't written enough about the site to justify it as a mainspace article. We like to keep stubs out of mainspace. Bongolian (talk) 18:41, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks, I'll add some more detail to the article as the night progresses! Thank you for your help!!! :) --Barca119 (talk) 18:43, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Links
Hey, I don't like to be confrontational  but I find some of your links added to pages to sometimes be excessive? For example, on Logan Robertson you linked this significant area of a quote to the Kinder, Küche, Kirche page as follows: "I sure wouldn't be voting for that new Labour lady… she needs to shut up and go home and get in the kitchen where women belong and bake a cake for her boyfriend." I just think this takes away from the legibility of the article, and when you link a quote like that it makes the reader think it is an external link to him saying the quote. You also linked New Zealand multiple times on the page when once would've been ok. Wikipedia article often don't link to the nationality/country of a person at all. I removed it for that reason. I know that RW does promote the linking to other pages, and I do appreciate the humour in your links, but sometimes I think it does promote too much confusion about what exactly a person is clicking on when it is too ambiguous. Should you disagree, feel free to clarify, but I did want to make this point heard. Thanks :) --Debunky (talk) 11:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi ! I think the use of Kinder, Küche, Kirche highly appropriate in that case. It has been used elsewhere in RW in similar such cases, e.g. "a woman's place is in the home and subservient to her husband" on page Jesus Is Savior, "traditional gender roles" on Roy Masters, and "1950s gender roles" on Tucker Carlson. Virtually no one is going to say "Kinder, Küche, Kirche" outright anymore, so it's basically a shorthand for forms of antifeminism that dictate rigid gender roles. When you tell a woman to shut up, go home and bake for her male significant other, that's certainly hitting the mark of what Kinder, Küche, Kirche was about.


 * As for the multiple links to New Zealand on a single page, I actually don't remember doing that, and I have generally removed multiple repeated links from a single page, so you're fine removing those. Bongolian (talk) 17:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Madder root
Could you sort out the redirects - it seems to be a 3-4 stage process to get to the right section. (I have a passing interest in dyes and colours, hence the checking.) Anna Livia (talk) 10:27, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think I fixed it. Let me know. Bongolian (talk) 17:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Not quite - typing in 'Madder root' goes to 'List of herbs and spices' & then to the right place. Would do it myself if it was 'simple'. Anna Livia (talk) 18:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think I understand the problem then. Bongolian (talk) 18:19, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Oxy
Do you think she'll stay gone?

I acted too hastily. I wanted the fighting to stop. I...I regret bringing that coop case forward. I hope she does come back. RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:26, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I cannot speak for her. She's has a retired sign on her homepage since December, but it hasn't stopped her from editing. It's probably best that you tell her directly. LGM and I have tried to push for more civility, to date there has not seemed to be much interest in changing the code of conduct. The civility page that I started could possibly serve as a template if you think it's time for a change. Bongolian (talk) 17:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ronin. To be honest I act too hastily, but the recent Biden affair almost made me quit this wiki for real this time. I was legitimately disgusted. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  05:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Why
did you rewrite The Crow's section? That was the compromise. You removed the reference to the Tom King call, why? That's why I reverted it. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  05:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You mean Larry King? I thought it was flimsy, But I'll add add back the call tomorrow. It's mentioned in the WaPo story that I cited after all. Bongolian (talk) 07:37, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Larry, whatever. I just take issue with the fact you wholesale reverted it, and there wasn't a consensus that WaPo was okay. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  07:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Why was my Gish Gallop example removed?
I thought the Library of Hate seemed like a great example of a race realist gish gallop. Is it because it's from a Twitter account? Because the fact that someone bothered to write up all of those """facts""" obviously thought it would be of worth to the alt-right. --GekoNeko (talk) 14:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That was who did that: you'd have to ask her. A better place to ask about such things is usually on the relevant talk page (Talk:Gish Gallop). Bongolian (talk) 15:55, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Mr Pence
You have been caught moonlighting as an editor of a blasphemous but obscure wiki in some backwater of the internet. You are hereby under arrest. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  10:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You apparently neglected to read the message at the top of this page. Thank you for feeding the troll. Bongolian (talk) 16:15, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

To Do List New Articles sections
So, after closing the votes for the Jeffrey Epstein suggestion & the Dakota Access Pipeline suggestion, I saw that the Jeffrey Epstein one is still only a section from the Clinton Body Count page. And I have no idea whether I should open that vote poll again and move it back to the "Most Wanted Articles" section or not since I don't know if it will mess up the other votes in that section. Beyond Reality (talk) 13:47, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , If you think you have enough missional material to make a separate article for Epstein that is broader than the existing section, go ahead and do it, either in draftspace or mainspace. Unless there are many down-votes votes in the To Do list, you shouldn't take it as an absolute. Bongolian (talk) 16:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Question...
You blocked that sock of Ken’s but did we even reach a consensus on his block? Last I recall it was 10 to 14 spilt and there was no real resolution. AceModerator 00:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ken's being an abusive nuisance with multiple socks popping up subsequent to his coop case. If there's no agreement  to ban, then he won't need the socks. Bongolian (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Accounts according to policy should get blocked if there's ban evasion taking place. However I banned the user for only a few days while also putting them in the vandal bin to see what they do assuming they wait out the block duration. 01:18, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean, the fact that Ken wastes his socks on pursuing petty feuds rather than making a clear argument for why we should keep him around is... quite telling actually. 01:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I’m not overly concerned. Just wondering where we wound up given it doesn’t seem a conclusion was reached. AceModerator 02:17, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

RationalWiki:AC
Hey Bongolian, I was wondering why you deleted my redirect? Jejasas258 (talk) 07:50, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It didn't seem necessary. Bongolian (talk) 08:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

The 6 actors i put in The hollywood conservatives list. Way did you remove them jn the first place?
I just wanted to ask way? Those 6 actors are indeed conservatives and Republicans. I know becuase i did the research &mdash; Unsigned, by: 24.105.237.213 / talk
 * Living people, no citations. If you want to add citations for them, I have no objection. The page could probably use some cleanup in that regard. Bongolian (talk) 01:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What does citation mean?
 * I don't think it needs a clean up. I really just what to put them back in with no problems, that's what I hope. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 24.105.237.213 / talk
 * For living people especially, you should have an actual source, either a web citation or a citation to a physical publication, not just your saying that person X said Y. E.g. you knew that one of them tweeted something but you have no link to the tweet. Bongolian (talk) 02:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh I understand now, I need to add links.


 * Vera Miles may be hard. I found out she is a republican throw Wikipedia and their source doesn't have a link. It just says it came from a 1956 magazine that she surpported Dwight Eisenhower Re-election campaign. She is still alive by the way &mdash; Unsigned, by: 24.105.237.213 / talk
 * She also may no longer be a conservative. Bongolian (talk) 02:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Depends, it didn't say anything about her switching parties in her life. I mean I could put her in and mention. That it came from a old magazine as Wikipedia does give the name to it
 * Party alignment doesn't always indicate political ideology. 02:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Edit Warring
You asked me for my opinion on the edit warring that Oxyaeana repeatedly. I'm too exhausted to follow up with anything but Oxyaena hasn't learned anything dealing with content dispute and the community is exhausted too. I really don't know the right direction to go but Christ maybe you can take up the mantle of teaching people to not edit war oh gosh. 23:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * For some reason, I don't often across edit warring unless it's brought to my attention. I follow a lot of pages, but not so much the political ones, which might be more prone to edit warring. Bongolian (talk) 00:01, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I’ve never been edit-warred over a history or country page. 00:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

I
didn't know it was mod protected. I only found out after I made the edit. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  16:51, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I assumed as much and gave you the benefit of the doubt. Bongolian (talk) 16:57, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Deletion
Hi, just wanted to know why you think a redirect of D Trump is useless. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 06:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Does anyone call him that? Is there any actual current link on RW that uses it? No. Bongolian (talk) 06:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * For the first question, yes. But sure, I trust your judgement on the usefulness of it. Sorry that I wanted to help. shrug — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 06:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, no prob. Bongolian (talk) 06:32, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Israel
I take it you’re good with the changes I made there? 17:24, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I do trust your excellent writing, I just wanted to give you a warning/reminder about the shitstorm we once had about Israel/Palestine. I've only taken a brief look so far, but I will give it a thorough read soon. Bongolian (talk) 17:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

harassment stuff
Hi, I didn't want to interfere with the hastur and oxy stuff, but I have complaints of harassments myself and I would appreciate if you looked into it. Other mods refused to look into it and/or do anything about it. I compiled a list of the stuff here. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Godless_Raven/harassment Thank you very much nonetheless. 18:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not harassment. Stop calling it that. 18:13, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This comment applies to you too here. 18:18, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It is worth repeating here. Unsubstantiated or poorly substantiated claims of harassment can be a form of harassment in itself:

Making accusations of harassment can be inflammatory and hence these accusations may not be helpful in a dispute. It can be seen as a personal attack if harassment is alleged without clear evidence that the others' action is actually harassment, and unfounded accusations may constitute harassment themselves if done repeatedly. The result is often accusations of harassment on your part, which tends to create a nasty cycle. At the same time, claims of harassment should be taken seriously and not be summarily dismissed unless it becomes clear the accusations are not well-founded.
 * If you have a legitimate claim of being harassed, then bring the claim to our attention, but you absolutely must include clear reasons and links, and more than just one instance (unless it's something severe like doxing). Bongolian (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you even look at what I linked? https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Godless_Raven/harassment 18:57, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. Except for GC, you only cited one instance each per editor. Did you tell them to stop the offensive behavior (ad hominem attacks)? Did they persist? Bongolian (talk) 19:19, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Insults without substance are ad homs, nothing about what we wrote counted as ad homs. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  19:52, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Unless you actually witnessed it, or the person admitted to it on RW, or the person was convicted of necrophilia, then 'corpsefucker' is an ad hom. Bongolian (talk) 20:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

shrug I think calling me a "mong" is pretty out of line, that's even worse than calling someone a "retard". But okay, thanks for your answer. 20:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note the user was horrified when you said where that word was derived from and immediately apologized. Your argument is based on an exaggeration.-Flandres (talk) 20:17, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I did go on to say idiot instead, which isn't exactly civil, but you were being obtuse at the time, so I guess I lost my temper. Sorry again. Féinléiriú (talk) 20:18, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * To be clear, I accept your apology and hope we can move forward. (Edit: I meant to say that this is larger than a single person...) But this is more about a pattern of abusive language hurled at me without consequence - and seemingly will continue to not have any consequences based on the answers I had here. But okay, it is what it is.  20:21, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ratwiki does not really care about people being uncivil I guess but hopefully this can change. I for one think that a higher standard of discourse would improve the editing environment a lot. EK (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

the only reason why I tried to reason with Bongolian is because he did warn Hastur for saying that Oxy has "no friends", which is an attack on her and why it was justified (to warn Hastur); even Hastur agreed it was not acceptable. All good. But suddenly, when it comes to attacks directed at me, there is no such moderation. Nothing happens. And it is infuriating that this double standard of moderation happens this blatantly. That's why I am angry. I am not even asking for any punishments now, if the mods promise me that in the future they won't allow those attacks on my person or anyone else I would be happy and delete the list. But the fact that even despite providing evidence of a pattern of abusive language that I still get thrown at me yields no result leads me to believe its a fruitless endeavor. 20:41, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * There is a reason his nickname is the "God Emperor" on discord :) But in my experience the mods don't really do that much in normal circumstances on this site and since nobody else has the authority to do much, not much is really done about most of the problems. We need a clear civility policy and a clear way to bring breaches of that policy to mod attention for resolution, but that's still a work in progress. So far not much is being done about it. EK (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * To be clear, what is so fucking annoying is this obvious discrepancy. I mean, let's compare:

I dislike Oxy, I like Hastur; this isn't about partisanship but being consistent with the guidelines; I AGREE with Bongolian warning Hastur for that attack. This will discourage Hastur of attacking Oxy again, which is GREAT. Yet calling me a a "little shit", "moron", "you are a fucking tacky little prick" in the same comment doesn't even get mod attention. WHAT THE SHIT ARE YOU ALL SMOKING? What the fuck is wrong with you moderators? There isn't even a condemnation let alone moderator action. This is absurd and shameless. The attacks on me are far less benign than "you have no friends". If the mods told AMG to not do this again I would be satisfied, and this is the bottom of the barrel of the plethora of actions that could be taken. Yet not even that is being done. 20:57, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Addendum: Bongolian correctly condemned Hastur for the attack on his talk page, saying:

Why is this so hard for you to do AMG, why, like what the fuck is wrong with you? 21:00, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Fun fact: You have exactly the same nails-down-a-chalkboard quality as Oxy when in high dudgeon. This is obviously not a compliment. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 02:25, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, very nice compliment! 02:35, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Some of our users are not over-friendly so...well it's kind of like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnWalWAmryk Ariel31459 (talk) 02:53, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Godless Raven gets this 03:46, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 03:53, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If that's your intent,, that should go on your home page, not here. Bongolian (talk) 04:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Nah, i was kidding around. But thanks for evading anything i wrote. 04:10, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong with noting that a Qanon supporter won a Republican primary in a Congressional District where they have a good chance at winning a general?
I edited the Qanon page to note this, and you reverted my edit without explanation. I think its quite notable that a Qanon supporter won the Republican primary for CO-03, given that the District was won by Trump by about 12 points, and therefore could easily end up sending a Qanon supporter to Congress. &mdash; Unsigned, by: MappedTables / talk / contribs
 * Yes, but you didn't give the candidate's name or a citation. Also: On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Bongolian (talk) 07:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Do we delete talk pages?
You deleted Talk:Kill-all-uglies, claiming that "We don't need to retain the talk page if the main page is deleted", but this seems to be contradicted both by the hundreds of pages in Category:Talk pages for deleted articles and by this policy page which says that "Talk pages should never be deleted." Can you explain this apparent inconsistency? Jinkinson (talk) 13:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I have restored the talk page. Thank you for calling that to my attention. Bongolian (talk) 18:15, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination
—cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

quick question
Is it okay if I create a Category:Dead people or Category:Deceased? 08:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The category of living people was made specifically because of addressing potential issues of libel on RW. I'm not sure what the dead people category would accomplish. Bongolian (talk) 08:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * welp only categorization? I heard only you and a few users bother with categories. So I wanted to help. 08:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does this but it's arranged by year of death. 13:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello
Thanks for warning me, I'll try to make constructive edits now (although my previous edits werent supposed to be vandalism). Thanks again. TheFonz (talk) 09:10, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

May i help you with fixing the Hollywood Conservatives
I see things are starting to slow down there with cleaning it up and I can help and even added the sources of the ones I put in. If it helps. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 24.105.237.213 / talk
 * No thanks. It's not high priority, but it's a mess. I'll get around to it soon enough. Bongolian (talk) 17:17, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok than, just asking. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 24.105.237.213 / talk

Chicken Coop
Blocking somebody for 9 hours, who was discussing it on a talk page, and still telling them to discuss it on a talk page, is abusing your blocking rights. You can defend yourself in the coop. LongLostLegend (talk) 04:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I hope you don't consider me a troll
I didn't get a chance to respond to you before the deletion... I work nights... and I don't really understand how the social parts of this site work so I am writing to you here. Of course your right about p-values... I should have said the p-values suggest that HCQ has a beneficial impact. I rushed that statement and I didn't completely reflect on how best to state my position, which is more probabilistic in nature. I did much better in the body of the article where I said something to the effect of 'it was highly unlikely that we would have multiple studies achieving statistical significance if there was no beneficial impact.' P-values are the first step to achieving scientific consensus... any individual study can easily be wrong, but the likelihood significantly diminishes when multiple studies come to the same statistically significant conclusion (assuming that the studies don't have a common cofounder messing up the results and/or the researcher's aren't doing stupid things like P-fishing). I am not contesting the deletion or anything. I get it... implying but not saying Gilead's stock price might have something to do with the slanted HCQ news coverage and Google's censorship is dangerous... I am just trying to have a conversation. I hope you don't find it too inappropriate.AndyChrist (talk) 16:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, I don't consider you to be a troll. You've made some good edits elsewhere. Everyone here makes mistakes, including me. Recognizing one's defeats or mistakes is a quality that we value here. Bongolian (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Panther
I unblocked Panther. They made a single edit so I don't think you can call that "excessively trolling pages" AceModerator 01:43, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I guessed "sock of…" based on the wording, but you're welcome to your view. Bongolian (talk) 01:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We pulled Oxy up for similar blocking so just trying to be consistent. AceModerator 01:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

User:2600:1004:B03F:F70A:50F4:9E07:F1FC:9F81
Can you please explain why you have blocked this IP address for as long as 31415 seconds? This seems wholly unnecessary, to me it appears that a block of 3141 seconds would have been sufficient. Kiko4564 (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I was over-reacting, but it seemed to be part of a pattern of vandalism from a range of BoNs, probably the same person. Now unblocked. Bongolian (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Image:Koohanaru.jpg
Can you please delete this image? It appears to have been uploaded only for the purpose of vandalism. Kiko4564 (talk) 09:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There's some difficulty with doing that. You can see the discussion here: RationalWiki:Technical support. Bongolian (talk) 17:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Jontron
I apologise for not writing any stuff in that section I created but I did think it was worth noting that he's no longer subscribed to him, whereas he was last time he checked. Entirely possible and indeed probable that he still watches his videos and has simply unsubscribed from him to cover up his views (and he's still subscribed to steven crowder's second channel) but I thought that was worth discussing.
 * I probably would have left it if there was at least a link confirming what you said. You're welcome to add it back if you've can add evidence. Bongolian (talk) 16:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey
You might want to check out all things in moderation. Or GR's new userpage, for that matter.-Flandres (talk) 01:37, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Please mods, silence Raven!" 01:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you afraid of the mods seeing your behavior? Why would you want to hide from them?-Flandres (talk) 01:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Who is hiding, dipshit? 01:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And why would you infer that the mods would silence if they just saw what you were doing? You seemed awfully quick to speculate that.-Flandres (talk) 01:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Raven don’t call people dipshit if you want to object when people do it to you. 01:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, let me use Oxy's jargon instead, because when she did it, it was considered okay. "You miserable dumbfuck" Is that better? 01:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Since when have I said Oxy’s behavior was okay? I’ve jumped down her throat as much as anyone about the insults. 01:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, Oxy did not cheer to everyone constantly when you left, nor did she brag about it on her userpage.-Flandres (talk) 01:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, she is totally cool now! 01:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oxyaena is a troubled person. Why use her as a model?Ariel31459 (talk) 01:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I have read it. GR's incivility and wishing for other productive sysops to leave is conduct unbecoming of a sysop. I'm refraining from comment at the moment regarding the sysoprevoke. Bongolian (talk) 03:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Vandal bin
Firstly, thanks for unbanning me. I appreciate now being allowed to make edits, including to my talk page (which I was also blocked from editing for a short time). Secondly I am now aware that I am in somewhere called the "vandal bin", which restricts me to editing only once every 30 minutes. Can you advise me if you are planning on lifting this restriction after a certain time, or are you intending to keep this on indefinitely? Kiko4564 (talk) 12:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As you may have noticed, Nutty Roux took you out of the bin again with this explanation: User talk:Kiko4564. Bongolian (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

RobSmith
I’m definitely not gonna come out and defend the guy (personally I think a ban has been far too long a time coming...), but I figured I’d just check. Is there any kind of necessary consensus or whatever for the block? I’m not gonna go out and start another coop or whatever, but also I figure it’s probably best to check in case things get “Dramatique”. 03:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Consensus is not needed since he has the ability (Sysop) and knowledge to unblock himself. Bongolian (talk) 03:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh right, sorry I didn’t know he was a sysop. no worries then, sorry, carry on. 03:24, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit?
You reverted this edit and I'd like to know why. I read this RationalWiki:Newcomers and Help:Red links so I don't see how removing a red link for "domesticated" is a change that would need to be reverted. WhatIsAGoodUsername (talk) 03:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You made a red link (i.e., a link to a non-existent page), and it's unclear that there should be such a page. Also, if there were such a page on the topic, it would probably be called 'domestication', not 'domesticated'. Bongolian (talk) 04:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't make a red link, I removed it and you reverted that change. Take a look another look at the edit I made. WhatIsAGoodUsername (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. My mistake. Bongolian (talk) 07:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Advice?
Hi Bongolian, I was doing some patrolling when I ran into a strange edit by a BoN. It doesn't seem to be the typical sort of drive by trolling, since it has a citation. It feels off with how old the article cited is (2014) and the conclusions being drawn from the article. Yet I believe the BoN is acting in good faith. I wouldn't know enough about the subjects in question (although I did stumble upon this) to comment. Is the standard procedure to just leave it? Or revert? Or rewrite? I don't want to upset anyone, so I thought I would just ask. Sorry to have bothered you with my nonsense. - Rairyu75  ( Talk ) 18:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I kept the first part of the sentence, which is factually true with a good reference. And, I deleted the second part, which is speculative. It's hard to say that the project is inherently bad since it appears that the data will be public. Bongolian (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Added a bunch of (sourced) terms to Alt-right glossary
Just wanted to give you a heads-up since you've been active on that article a few years. TapTheForwardAssist (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm cleaning up your edits,, but good work overall. I don't go to Reddit much, but I see that it's still a Nazi sewer despite the leadership's recent promises. Also, I notice that there is information hidden on Reddit that shows up on fresh archives by Archive.is, indicating that they're hiding but not removing offensive some offensive content. Bongolian (talk) 17:54, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Reddit has relatively improved over time, generally when offensive stuff gets reported on by the mass media and Reddit is forced to crack down to appease advertisers. They deleted an absolute ton of racist, anti-semitic, and anti-trans subs earlier this year. Largely subs explicitly dedicated to over-the-top bigotry (or outright calling for fascism) have been removed, but they've tolerated the veterans of those subs moving to and taking over more mainstream subs so they can message a wider audience. So for an example, explicit Nazi subs get banned, but r/Tucker_Carlson daily has people posting about The Great Replacement, "Hitler did nothing wrong", "13%", literally citing the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, etc. Afaik TC is one of the largest and most outspokenly Nazi subs currently, and not just like "as racist as Tucker himself", but well well beyond that. And the other big one is r/PoliticalCompassMemes which was broadly a place for humorous memes poking at the foibles of various political stances, but after the main Nazi subs got banned this year a ton of them drifted to PCM and for some reason focus entirely on "ironic" memes praising the Nazis, demonizing minorities, etc. and it's all laughed off as "just a joke." So overall improvement, and Reddit severely pissed off a lot of right-wingers who bailed out to more Nazi-tolerant platforms, but Reddit isn't putting in the effort to really consistently weed it out, especially when it exists as an undercurrent of an "otherwise mainstream" sub. TapTheForwardAssist (talk) 19:46, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. It does not impress me about Reddit's management though. It seems to amount to just PR: banning hate subs rather than actually banning hate speech. It reminds me of Twitter where reporting hate speech is not appreciated because it makes work and is bad publicity. Bongolian (talk) 20:31, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Uhm...
This guy? Should we... assume good faith (Bongolian wtf is this? Would I get in trouble if I just yeeted them? I know some people are angry that users are trigger happy with blocks, but for f%$£'s sake...)? - Rairyu75  ( Talk ) 18:18, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I already dealt with it. 18:20, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would also presume that there's trollish intent for that account. Bongolian (talk) 18:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Email
I've sent you one. It's somewhat urgent. Apologies for the inconvenience. Coigreach (talk) 00:56, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. Bongolian (talk) 01:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Coigreach (talk) 01:11, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Uh, looked into it a bit more, and seems there's some additional work needed, email sent. Sorry. Coigreach (talk) 01:36, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything but links to reputable sources: Axios and Coda Story in the other edits. Bongolian (talk) 01:42, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The last link (after the doxing claim) doesn't show in the references. If you click on it though, it goes straight to the retweet. Coigreach (talk) 01:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. Done. Bongolian (talk) 01:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Coigreach (talk) 01:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Levitt
I appreciate that one failed prognostication may not constitute a Noble disease. However, consider the following:

1) Predicted no more than 10 dead in Israel (there are over 1,000 now)

2) Predicted 3,000 dead in the US, then progressively higher numbers until 170,000 (over 200,000 now)

3) Similar wrong predictions for other areas.

4) Attacked the entire field of epidemiology as "failed"

5) Supports the false "only 6% of reported COVID deaths are from COVID, the rest are "'with' COVID " misinterpretation of CDC data

6) Supports building infection-based herd immunity, something every epidemiologist and public health expert say would be catastrophic.

7) Continues to claim that lockdowns killed more people than they saved.

8) Completely ignores and in one case denied the long-term morbidity experienced by a large number of recovered cases.

9) Worst of all (IMO): used eugenic arguments to justify letting COVID spread freely. &mdash; Unsigned, by: Lamb1914 / talk / contribs


 * I think if you based the Nobel disease entry on eugenics and anti-epidemiology, it would be reasonable. Bongolian (talk) 23:52, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Was that some kind...
...of joke? Shabi DOO  18:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, no. That's what it states at the top of the coop: the person that starts an invalid vote is to be blocked. I assumed it was you because you were the first vote. If it wasn't you, then I apologize. Bongolian (talk) 19:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It wasn't an invalid vote. It wasn't about punishments or involving any of the users who was cooped but about whether coops should be rehashed at all. Shabi  DOO  21:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Policy decisions like that probably shouldn't be done in Coop anyway. 22:05, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) My reading of this is that it pertains to coop votes period. But that votes in the coop should pertain to specific individuals.

When presenting a case here, be sure to include whom you are accusing, what exactly you are accusing them of, some hard evidence, and a brief explanation. Since the sole purpose of the Coop is to resolve these disputes, don't post unrelated or more generalized complaints here — if you do, your posts will be moved off the page. Any vote started within 48 hours of filing will be deleted and you will be blocked.
 * 2) It was a confusingly-worded voting issue ("Vote to only rehash coops for contentious or irregular old bans...if the users actually come back and contest or try to make edits"), since as far as I'm aware, individuals already have such a right, particularly if new significant evidence is presented. Bongolian (talk) 22:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree, but people do have the right to appeal a block that they disagree with, and/or feel is invalid. This is different from sockpuppeting and editing whilst unlawfully at large, like Smith did. That is unacceptable. Kiko4564 (talk) 22:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It probably wasn't the right place to put that vote but I think it could have been just moved or as was done, removed. The block was slightly over-the-top. Shabi  DOO  22:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. This sort of reminds me of Pisos justice. I think blocks in this case, should be at the discretion of a sysop, not mandatory. Are they mandatory? Kiko4564 (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

A 1-hour block that he could have undone himself — it's hardly over-the-top. If you want to reopen the vote in the RationalWiki talk:Community Standards page, that's fine with me. I would like a proposed policy change to be clearer: does it apply to everyone who was permabanned due to irregular procedure or just those who petition to be reinstated. Bongolian (talk) 01:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

My promotion
Hi Bongolian, I would like to appeal against your decision to promote me to a regular editor. I fail to see how this was a valid decision given that I had already been demoted to autopatrolled by User:Duce Mooslini User:DuceMoosolini, who was aware that I am an admitted vandal. Can you please demote me again, or at least explain why you promoted me? Thanks. Kiko4564 (talk) 11:12, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Why would I want to demote a vandal? Bongolian (talk) 16:36, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Because I won't do it again. Have I vandalised since User:DuceMoosolini demoted me? Kiko4564 (talk) 17:42, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes .Even Duces own userspace . The fact that you undid those vandalism's yourself, doesn't change the fact that you vandalized them in the first place. 18:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

My vandalbinning
Hi Bongolian, I'm really sorry for my behaviour which included vandalising multiple pages. Are you willing to consider removing me from the vandal bin please? I'm also sorry for trolling talk pages, I will avoid trolling or telling anyone what to do, or not to do in the future. I will also avoid vandalising pages in the future. Whilst I'm at it, how should I deal with someone repeatedly contacting me, then telling me to leave them alone when I respond? I will try and leave them alone, but what if they keep bothering me to the point of pissing me off? Kiko4564 (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I have removed you from the vandal bin. Regarding your issue with the unspecified user, it sounds like harassment, which is contrary to community standards. You can bring the specific details to the attention of one or more moderators for a response (e.g., here: RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation). If you are being harassed by email, you also have option to disable email from users here: Special:Preferences Bongolian (talk) 20:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, for the record I'm asking about a hypothetical situation which I feared might happen in the future, and not an actual situation here. Kiko4564 (talk) 09:19, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi
It won't let me create an article when I try to. Can you autoconfirm my account? MrYellow (talk) 15:54, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I've given you autopatrolled. 16:23, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Made a techretired template.
Thought I'd let you know: Template:Techretired. Put it together this afternoon. Suggesting placing this on top of talkpages of retired techs. I've done it for all current techs that have been retired because of inactivity. It informs them of their deroled status and adds them to a category (for quickly checking). 20:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, looks good. Bongolian (talk) 20:53, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Intellectual dishonesty
You actually wrote this in the Civility article inspired by me?
 * intellectual dishonesty is uncivil because it is insincere. One may be wrong while maintaining intellectual honesty, but intellectual honesty requires that one accepts when one is demonstrably wrong, that one does not intentionally make misrepresentations

Not to re-litigate the issues at Conservapedia_talk:RobSmith, but you've never really come clean on your motivations for inserting deliberate faleshoods in that bio article about a living person. nobsSmile, and be friends.. 10:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't get your ego inflated. Just because it applies to you doesn't mean it was inspired by you. Bongolian (talk) 17:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice deflection. You ever gonna come clean on the intellectually dishonest edits you inserted into the biography of a living a person? nobsSmile, and be friends.. 17:55, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Can I suggest splitting Gavin McInnes into a spinoff "Proud Boys" article?
The article is getting further and further off the topic of Gavin himself, and I submit that with the vastly increased interest in the Proud Boys this week, a spinoff article focused on the movement rather than its founder is warranted. Thoughts? TapTheForwardAssist (talk) 04:40, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , The best place to discuss this would be on the talk page for Gavin McInnes (Talk:Gavin McInnes), and it's a good idea to ping any sysops who made recent significant contributions. Bongolian (talk) 04:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Yo
You've been nominated for reelection by some mysterious individual. 18:05, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Hey
Just saw your text. Sorry :/ Still, the articles make me queasy, it's hard enough for me to pick through them looking for weakness in arguments. I'm never going to cite "The Bell Curve" on this wiki, and I hope nowhere else, either... I just wish that the people on this wiki were a little more aggressive in dealing with the pedo apologists. Btw, as a university student (doesn't mean much, I know, lol), it is my opinion that "peer-review" in any sociology science is the same as mob-ocracy, only funded by interest groups!


 * -- Goatspeed. 19:50, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Renaming
Idk if this was intentional or not, but you didn't actually rename Two dots. You just moved their user page (without consulting them, by the way). To rename them there is a particular function that I don't recall if mods have but techs definitely do--Hastur! (talk) 22:36, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Mods do have it. Special:RenameUser is the relevant page here. 23:12, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * That said, I am with Hastur that this should have received a notice before renaming, so I'm leaving it as is right now. 23:13, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Notified the user and gave them the choice for a new username themselves. Unless they respond in a timely fashion, I'll rename their account. 23:17, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, OK. Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 03:46, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Please
Please check the MCD talk page instead of reverting and ignoring. This is why I didn't want to make a RW acc.
 * You made a seemingly wild assertion with no citation: that's why I reverted it. The information that you gave on the talk page seems to be an extrapolation that the authors of the paper did not make. I don't have access to the full text of the paper. The burden of proof is on you. Bongolian (talk) 05:42, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, but??? It's basic math. I wrote an essay about this with 20 sources and am less than a month from finishing it. I wrote this on CP (but its DDOSed ATMSievert 81 (talk) 05:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not my problem. Go complain to Fun:Assfly. RationalWiki is not the spare part to fix a broken Conservapedia. Bongolian (talk) 06:31, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I wanted to talk sense into RW like LT and Rob tried to. That was clearly a mistake. IM going to bed, hopefully CP will work tomorrow. Gl with your prions article. Sievert 81 (talk) 07:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Please tell me the difference between a prion disease and a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, then read this sentence again.
'Some diseases are prion diseases, but not TSEs. An example would be Alzheimer's disease, caused by prion isoforms of beta-amyloid and tau.' By me, on my prions diff. Please tell me how you managed to interpret that as 'TSEs are not caused by prions'. Or at least define 'prion' for me, so I know what you think a 'prion isoform' is.Sievert 81 (talk) 03:05, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I misread that. I was wrong. Also, FYI, transmittable is a word, but you were correct that transmissible is preferred in the context that you corrected. Bongolian (talk) 03:20, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you revert the edit and unprotect the page then? And apologize on my talk page? Sorry for the confusion, and 'transmittable' shows up as not a word and is corrected to 'transmissible' on Firefox for me. Thanks. Sievert 81 (talk) 03:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You need to provide a citation that confirms what you wrote first. The main problem is that you've been trying to add text to mainspace without providing a citation, or providing a citation on the talk page to an article that is paywalled. Bongolian (talk) 03:29, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2019/05/414326/alzheimers-disease-double-prion-disorder-study-shows is paywalled? Sievert 81 (talk) 03:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Your addition stated, "Some diseases are prion diseases, but not TSEs. An example would be Alzheimer's disease, caused by prion isoforms of beta-amyloid and tau." And that internal news story is supportive of that, but the Wikipedia page indicates that the etiology is not settled science and that amyloid-beta as prion is only one of several hypotheses. Bongolian (talk) 04:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Can I change it to 'Some scientists hypothesize Alzheimer's disease may be a prion disease caused by prion isoforms of beta amyloid and tau"? Sievert 81 (talk) 04:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I have edited the page, including your last suggestion, and removed the protection. Please add citations if you're making additions or corrections. Bongolian (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Account creation disabled
Please be careful, when issuing permanent bans, not to also block IP addresses, as an IP addresses are not permanent to their users, if that makes sense--Hastur! (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If you're referring to User "𝗦𝗠𝗜𝗧𝗛 𝗠𝗘𝗔𝗧𝗣𝗨𝗣𝗣𝗘𝗧 𝗝𝗢𝗛𝗡𝗦". That person has been harassing RW for months with vandalism, so the permaban was well-warranted. Also as a rule, I do not block IP addresses for more than pi days. Bongolian (talk) 19:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * IP address variation is also slightly dependant. Infiniblocking IPv6 individually (not range) generally is fine, there's like a million allocations per household alone (cuz of the insanity of the range available, ISPs just go kinda nuts here). IPv4 tends to be slightly more questionable for infiniblocking, but if you know if the ISP does static or non-static IPs (some ISPs limit this), it could be fine to block out a notorious user. 22:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If it's so unlikely this IP address would be rehomed then I suppose it's not a big deal--Hastur! (talk) 09:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations
—cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Congrats on winning re-election. -- Goatspeed. 05:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I look forward to working with you on the mod squad! Bongolian (talk) 06:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Gavin McInnes
In https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Gavin_McInnes&oldid=2261331 you added the phrase "lohud". Typo? Of what? Or jargon? What does it mean? Thanks. Dave Wise (talk) 20:54, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 'lohud' is actually the name of the website as it appears, though it is apparently The Journal News. Bongolian (talk) 21:00, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Drive-by pointless observation phrased as a question that need not be answered
Is there an article you haven't touched? You did a lot of quality from the start but you've really poured it on all these years later. Bongo-wiki? Maybe? MarmotHead (talk) 22:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * There are probably a few in mainspace that I haven't edited. Certainly there are many in non-mainspace that I haven't. Bongolian (talk) 00:06, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Tech Stuff
Also asked DG, but until he responds...

So apparently, as a tech that gets demopped, I can restore my mop. As sysop that gets blocked, I can unblock myself. But if I get demopped and blocked, I don't seem to have access to the user rights page anymore and can't fix that. Am I missing something; what tools do I have to fix that? CoryUsar (talk) 18:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know the answer to that. Since you're currently tech + sysop, does it matter? Bongolian (talk) 19:06, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * A few weeks ago, in a hissy-fit, someone both demopped and perma-blocked me. So it did matter then. CoryUsar (talk) 19:12, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You can always appeal via BoN (or a new temporary account) for rights restoration (RationalWiki:Requests for user rights or RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation). If the rights removal was unilateral/unwarranted, it could be grounds for punishment (I would expect just a warning for first offense though). Bongolian (talk) 19:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the user did apologize after they calmed down a bit. I try to avoid coop drama whenever possible. CoryUsar (talk) 19:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to hear that. Bongolian (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my mistake
Thanks for adding my draft to the Draft category, I'm dumb and tired and forgot to when I made it. Quantumgeek333 (talk) 04:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. Bongolian (talk) 04:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Note
I have opened a discussion, which you may in interested in, on RationalWiki_talk:Community_Standards. Feel free to comment. Judge Dredd (talk) 12:44, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 19:06, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Permabooting nobs
It's not wrong, I highly doubt nobs would have get enough countervotes at this point, but the vote had to last for at least 7 days. Is there a specific reason that you chose to expedite his block? I'm merely curious, again I'm not about to contest it, I just want to know your reasoning for closing it after only 5. 08:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I got ahead of myself and miscounted (editing while sleepy). Any eligible voter who wants to protest and reopen the vote can ask me and I'll undo it. Bongolian (talk) 08:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Out of consideration for fairness, I put things close to where they were. Bongolian (talk) 08:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Perfectly understandable and thanks. Again, it's not a big deal, we all get ahead of ourselves sometimes (the vote isn't remotely close, so I doubt it'd change anything but I really don't want to bother with having to reconsider nobs' case on a technicality like this). 08:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

User Me?
Would a namechange to 'Meh!' be appropriate? (Rather than post to their talk page and be deleted.) Anna Livia (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The talk page duplicated the user's home page. The only content were userboxen that are really only appropriate for home pages. Bongolian (talk) 20:51, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit summary too much trouble?
Why? I am not necessarily disagreeing with your reversion. Rather, I'd like to know the reasoning behind it, if you don't mind-Hastur! (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Overall, the commentary seemed disjointed compared to the text (e.g., "Yes, he is helping the Sudanese, Somalis, Palestinians and Rohingyas so unwaveringly." and "Syrians are so tranquil. That's why they never flee their country.") Also the writing style seemed excessively informal (e.g., "Mo"). Bongolian (talk) 04:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * K, I'll correct it a little then. 183.83.146.234 (talk) 05:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I might just be getting oversensitive or whatever, but, while I get the point of the “why isn’t he helping the Rohingya” etc line, part of me feels like it should either be reworded or removed? It just kinda feels a little crass to me, it kinda sounds like it’s using the genocide of a religious group as a way to mock that group’s religion. I know that’s probably not how it’s intended but it kinda comes off that way to me. Idk. 06:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The user in question has contributed to several Suras so far this year and has done very good commentary. I see nothing wrong with that particular line. Unfair persecution of Muslims is pretty much direct evidence that Allah does not offer unwavering support and that their book is full of impossible claims. Shabi  DOO  13:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I think this is a good example of why we shouldn't rollback first and ask questions later-Hastur! (talk) 16:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I will admit that I probably should have patrolled then edited instead of rollback. I did have some hesitation at the time. Bongolian (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * — that’s fair enough. I personally would prefer it to be reworded in a less snarky way maybe? Like something like “despite this, many Muslim groups are consistently persecuted for their religion, which implies” etc or idk. I’m just sorta sensitive about it bc of some personal/friend/IRL shit, but I do definitely get the point and understand that it’s in good faith, and I may just be wrong here. Idk that’s just the thoughts in my Brain Hole 00:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's worth re-editing in my view. Bongolian (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Done Shabi  DOO  12:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Troll on wikipedia
Someone has been impersonating you on wikipedia. This is most likely due to on-wiki matters.
 * https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Bongolian is the account, Sievert 81 (talk) 05:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)


 * From what I can see, they're probably some teenager in Horry County (based on their critical editing on Horry County Schools). Wouldn't doubt if they were a persistent vandal here too. 2603:6080:5700:4C4E:BD65:C14B:5BC4:382A (talk) 05:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's not much I can do about that. I don't edit on Wikipedia much, and not under that name. Bongolian (talk) 06:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Article Criteria
I fixed and added the things many of the moderators asked in the draft for Brittany Dier Venti. No need to rush and apologies if I came off like I was trying to rush. Feel free to let me know what still needs to be fixed. &mdash; Unsigned, by: Amerimutt / talk / contribs
 * You should probably ask or  if it's good enough yet.
 * Also, On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you.
 * Bongolian (talk) 04:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit on prion page
I don’t understand why 60,000 cases was removed when the sample size was to small, which is why i was trying to debunk it? Sievert 81 (talk) 08:02, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think I misunderstood what you were trying to say. It's fine to put it back. You might might want to change 'showed' to 'reported' though. Bongolian (talk) 08:06, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

???
What the fuck?. 01:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Extremely incorrect. 01:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you meant this diff. 01:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. 01:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Vatican is another city state. That change was not mine but 's. Bongolian (talk) 01:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The article history says you added it back after I removed it the first time. 01:48, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think that was due to an edit conflict that I was not alerted to: I had only intended to change "lacks" to "lack" in that edit. Bongolian (talk) 02:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah I see, sorry for getting irked. 05:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No prob. Bongolian (talk) 05:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Third Man
What do you think of user: OrsonWells? is he a troll? Leucippus Talk 19:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , OrsonWells was banned by on the perhaps plausible reason that it's a sock of the banned user Ken. For now, I'll leave it to Christopher to justify the ban. Bongolian (talk) 20:13, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It did seem plausible at the time, but I don’t think quoting a wired piece that disparages pollution is Ken’s style. If he isn’t Ken I’ve probably scared him off, but I’ll unblock him just in case. Christopher (talk) 20:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * His first post on "Liberals and the left" seemed like obvious troll behaviour. As for the wired article, it seemed like concern trolling, since it was pretty incongruous with the tone of his previous post. Cui bono me thinks Leucippus Talk 21:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

12 edits since July 2020
3 month block of a BoN? The rollback button doesn't suffer from wear and tear-Hastur! (talk) 19:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine, let's reduce it. I'm not committed to 3 months. 3 days or 3 weeks is OK by me. Bongolian (talk) 20:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Whack!
For noticing that a userpage had loli porn on it, but failing to delete it. Sievert 81 (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing that. Bongolian (talk) 20:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m just stunned that Wiki Commons allowed that image. Jeez. 22:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * At risk of sounding weird, but that's because loli porn has been deemed as legal by federal courts. Attempts to ban it on a state level in the US has consistently been ruled as unconstitutional. Commons probably just obeys US law as far as images go. 22:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

IRonMan block
Why’d you block ? All he’s done recently is add more to his harmless essay and discuss making another harmless essay. Maybe I missed something. Christopher (talk) 17:12, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Temporary annoyance, I suppose. I knew he'd get unblocked, as he already has been. Bongolian (talk) 17:30, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

How rude
Why did you remove my comment from Grammar Commie's talkpage suggesting him to lay off the wiki for a few days? Is it because I called out the obvious pissants who made him this frustrated in the first place? If GC loses his composure over indignation because of users on here, then he may as well take a break. That was not a bad suggestion either and the worst part about that is that he have to come back only because a coop was made against him. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 21:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Bongolian wiped out every comment made after a certain point in time, which was a fair call. Whether your comment was justified or not, it relates entirely to the (now once again ongoing) drama and wouldn’t have made sense with all the other stuff removed. Don’t start shit for no good reason. Christopher (talk) 21:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It was its own comment posted on its own section far away from the gossip between Helena Bonham Carter and Grammar Commie. There was no reason to delete and that shit pisses me off. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It was actually accidental: I only intended to remove GC's single comment. Bongolian (talk) 01:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

About the coop
As much as I agree that Scrooge is a troll and shouldn't vote (indeed, I dare to say that he's only voting because her wants more shitstorm), RW:EU and RW:MOB make clear that he can vote. I don't think we should supress his vote just because we believe it's the right thing. GeeJayK (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * My view is trolls/vandals shouldn't have the vote. If you feel so strongly about troll voting rights, change it back. Bongolian (talk) 00:38, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well I think you're correct that Scrooge is a troll, but I believe it's more complex than this. I'll give a stupid exemple to explain. Let's suppose that tomorrow we find evidence that the US election last year was in fact rigged and Trump actually won. Would you support his return? Well, I believe we should always  try follow the legislation and procedures, so I would personally would support his term, despite the deleterious effects side-effects. About reverting it, I'm not very sure. Unlike most people here I don't like mobocracies that much, I'm more of a representative democracy guy so I don't feel confident at reverting it, and I believe you mods are our representatives. You sure I can? GeeJayK (talk) 01:05, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think the analogy is valid. Democracies are based on rules. The mob is based on the mob; the rules are more like guidelines, and there is I believe precedent that the mob can overrule the rules. I'm not even sure that most people here like mobocracies; it's what we signed up for as sysops so that's what we play by. We could of course change to a democracy, but it's quite fraught to do so. Even relatively minor rule changes can be fraught. Like I said if you don't like what I did, you can change it back. I won't revert you but someone else could. Bongolian (talk) 01:13, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm back from my involuntary three day vacation. This is also about the coop. Since users insult one another all the time on this wiki, and in scientific circles, reasonably verifiable statements are not, or should not be, regarded as insults: why did you give me a 3 day block? I could have got a warning, or a shorter block. I'm pretty sure you two are not dating. Care to explain? If not, I will certainly forget about the matter and go about my business here. Santa doesn't need to know. UncleKrampus (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You can say something truthful and be civil, or you can also say something truthful and be uncivil about it. Civility is part of the RationalWiki:Community Standards. Bongolian (talk) 23:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello
It looks like you're a moderator, I was wondering if it would be possible for all my edits to the main space (but only the main space) to be reverted. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 21:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * We do not do that except with good cause (falsity, doxxing, libel, etc.). Bongolian (talk) 23:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So if I wanted it done I'd be required to do it myself? Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 01:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * No, just don’t do it. 01:33, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah - highly advisable to not try it dude. Ace303, 808, 909 02:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

VERY IMPORTANT!!!!
Hi Bongolian, would be interested to help expand Draft:Red Eagle Politics so it can be moved to the mainspace ASAP??? I've seen much of your interesting work, and maybe the current right-wing populist movement becoming increasingly relevant is something you should focus on????? Unclescrooge (talk) 22:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I never heard of them before you created that page. I think you should work on it further first.Bongolian (talk) 00:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

A question...
Can I remove the unwelcome template from my userpage now? Also, am I allowed to jettison some of the wikisig topics on my talkpage? 17:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, not Bongolian, but unfortunately, you can't. See here. But don't worry, mistakes happen, no one will judge you for that, most people won't even see the unwelcome template, let alone the reason why it's there. GeeJayK (talk) 17:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You can instead set up auto-archiving of your talk page, so it will be less apparent in future. See User:Inferno Bot for instructions. Bongolian (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. This is actually something of a big deal for me; seeing the stupid stuff I'd done isn't a great help for my anxiety issues. 18:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Since I don't want to creat another topic just for something so small, I'll say it here. I think BoN is right on the first one. The fact that those guys are Catholics doesn't say anything about Shroud of Turin. Of course it's fake, but this argument doesn't convice me. What do you think? GeeJayK (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Upon rereading, I think you're right. I've reverted my edit. Bongolian (talk) 20:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Page deletion request
This edit was reverted but raised a genuine concern and issue. Oenophyta (talk) 01:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This was already addressed on your talk page: use the template and follow the instructions for starting a discussion on page deletion. Bongolian (talk) 04:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I created one on Anatoly Karlin - is there any chance you could create the deletion page to replace the old one? Oenophyta (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm reluctant to do that because that would be the third attempt to delete it. Maybe you should see if you can get an you can get any support for the idea in the Saloon first. Bongolian (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Can you hide/delete this edit?
This edit links to a png that contains false and defamatory allegations about different individuals. The blog that posted it has since redacted the names from it but the old png url with libel on it is still linked to in the edit.Request25 (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. Christopher (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Christopher. Bongolian (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Where do I find the "Relocate" option for a draft page? Or is this only something mods can do?
I'm trying to move Draft:Love Has Won into mainspace; it's a stub, but I've covered just about everything I want to. I know there's a "Relocate" option that needs to be clicked if I want to move it, but I can't find that anywhere. Could you help me? --Zoe Kirk (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * We used to let almost anyone move pages, but a bunch of page move vandalism (which takes ages to clean up) prompted us to make it a sysop only thing. Imo it should’ve been autopatrolled, might raise the issue at tech support at some point. I’ve moved it. Christopher (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I've tried, he is too much of a coward to take me up on it. He invites me to discuss with him on his CP mail page only to block and oversite when I do. In the meantime he is free to mock and slander me on my talk page which I have asked to be protected which does not happen.--Mercian (talk) 21:03, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Spud has changed the protection on your talk page. Bongolian (talk) 07:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, me again
Is there a way I can be notified when a Coop comes up? 20:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, on most pages there is a star icon on the second row of commands. If it's hollow, you're not following that page. Click on it and it will fill in to indicate that you will get an email when the page changes. You can control your page watch list here: Special:Preferences. Bongolian (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Alternatively, if you have email disabled, you can also go to Special:Watchlist. Should do the same thing. Techpriest (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Anatoly Karlin
Hi,

I see you worked on the Anatoly Karlin article. A few days ago Karlin got his RationalWiki article URL completely blocked/de-indexed (so it doesn't show) in all European countries by filing a Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decision on the right to be forgotten. He's obviously lied in the report, but nevertheless he succeeded in blocking his article fully. If you search his name on Google on any European IP/VPN, you get the 'Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe'. His article has been blocked in Europe. Is there any chance you could add a brackets to his article name/URL? Rename it to Anatoly Karlin (white nationalist) and the article will show up again on google. 2A0B:F4C2:1:0:0:0:0:1 (talk) 03:35, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * We at RationalWiki would also love for Karlin to be forgotten, but we would prefer it to be worldwide. Do you have a citation to that ruling? I don't think we have any precedent for making adjustments based on such a ruling, and I'm not sure it would have much effect. Bongolian (talk) 03:43, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm currently on an American VPN - the article shows fine the top on Google same for South Korea and Brazil. However, on any European VPN (German, UK, French, Poland etc) it doesn't show and a message comes up a bottom saying links have been removed because of the CJEU issue. 74.91.0.56 (talk) 04:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * See Karlin's article talk. I disagree with the first anon - I think Karlin's article should be deleted, if anything the CJEU issue supports at least a new AFD. 159.65.58.40 (talk) 04:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Karlin's article was never blocked in Europe. The Tor IP is likely Mikemikev spreading BS.194.39.126.89 (talk) 11:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Mikemikev has now shown up on the article using another sock account (projector) and another suspected IP.194.39.126.89 (talk) 11:36, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Noted. Bongolian (talk) 16:47, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Delete entry about me
Moving to the correct location Christopher (talk) 21:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

COVID-19 Pandemic edit
"Out of a total force of 320 Secret Service agents, 881 tested positive"... please add the missing digit. &mdash; Unsigned, by: Dave Wise 2 / talk / contribs
 * Fixed. Thanks! Bongolian (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Afd
forgot to let you know 2021 U.S. Capitol riot/Charges has been nominated for deletion. Christopher (talk) 16:27, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Bongolian (talk) 17:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Nomination
11:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but I have declined. Bongolian (talk) 16:28, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Speaking of Noms, I didn't get one from you this time. Have I pissed off too many people?  03:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * There, it's done. Bongolian (talk) 03:16, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for archiving all that gibberish
I wanted to do this too, but I think it would be easily reverted since I'm not a mod, and I didn't want to do anything controversial since I'm running for the board. I'm glad it's gone. Too bad Oxy LACB'd again. I hope she returns. GeeJayK (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. It may also help that I didn't vote in that coop except to retain USH's right to edit talk pages. Bongolian (talk) 21:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I second this thank you. <font color="#00abcb">𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒  talk  21:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought up a new phrase to describe that mess. "This has more cringeworthy drama than a middle school theatre club orgy."  Not sure if that's too horrifying an image or the right amount of gross.  21:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely the right decision to archive early. Christopher (talk) 21:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I think at some point whatever purpose that case had was lost and just became a pretext for pettiness. 主要行事月 (talk) 21:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for acting quickly to derail what was turning into an awful crapfest. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 21:36, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Astonishingly appropriate. UncleKrampus (talk) 22:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't edit templates to add usage-specific details
Templates are meant to be general use. I've reverted your edits to Template:LANCB since it was used on someone else's userpage as well. Instead I've inserted the messagebox template on Oxy's userpage. Just giving you a heads-up for in the future. If you want to add a usage specific thing, do something like in the body of the template. That leaves a blank message if the first parameter is empty or if it's not empty it fills it with the text of that parameter. I didn't do that here because the template is so low-usage I don't see it relevant to do so. Techpriest (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks! Bongolian (talk) 20:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Heads up
Going over its history I noticed you edited Critics of the historicity of Jesus a while back and we have had something about it being on mission and a submission for deletion going to be filed in the talk page. Just wanted you to have a heads up.--BruceGrubb (talk) 01:16, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will take a look. Bongolian (talk) 02:30, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Jaysus Bongo.
How the heck do you perform so many productive things here? Do you make your coffee with Red Bull instead of water? You cloning yourself or some shit? Well, whatever the reason is, I appreciate ya. You absolute man-beast.

Sincerely. - Rairyu75  ( Talk ) 17:08, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Rairyu75. Coffee, yes! Red Bull, no. Bongolian (talk) 17:35, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Possible revert
Would I be allowed to undo my edits to one particular page? If it effects your decision, this kinda means a lot to me. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 21:38, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks like Kauri0.o already reverted your edits on that page, or were you talking about something else? There's nothing wrong with self-reverts when you've realized you made a mistake. Bongolian (talk) 23:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism that took place and a creepy user
The recent vandalism that took place in the Saloon Bar is caused by the same user who sent me a creepy message in my talk page (User talk:Rationalzombie94). What should I do? --Get Vaccinated (talk) 13:35, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , the creepy message was reverted by GrammarCommie, and the account was banned by Plutocow. You also have the option of protecting your user and talk pages from non-autoconfirmed users. Bongolian (talk) 16:36, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --Get Vaccinated (talk) 19:38, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Uh
When moving Paul Gosar to Draft:Paul Gosar, you didn't move Talk:Paul Gosar to Draft talk:Paul Gosar.--Andrew5 (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have fixed that now. Bongolian (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Banned template
Yo, added a new flag called modarchive to the banned template. Works exactly like cooparchive but for ATIM. -- Techpriest (talk) 21:05, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you, . Bongolian (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Unexplained edit
At Draft:Bret Weinstein you just reverted my use of the "cite web" template. Why? Connor Behan (talk) 15:45, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , sorry that was a mistake on my part. I have reverted my edit. Bongolian (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Odinson
I've always thought that the descent of the British royals through Odin by way of Cerdic of Wessex, according to the Anglo Saxon Chronicle, to be an interesting factoid, and thought it would be amusing in that context. If you disagree so be it. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 17:33, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Descent from Cerdic, sure, but not so interesting. Bongolian (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Apropos of that, there's minor tradition of making 'complete' genealogies going back to Adam. I once heard an orthodox Jew describe such a genealogy of his ancestors on the radio, for example. Such genealogies are reminiscent of the Ussher chronology and about as believable. Bongolian (talk) 17:45, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Bill Clinton
I'll see your deletion and raise you a source. You'll therefore, thereafter, have no further need to interfere with the article.Field Dreamer (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

No love for a packed gallery?
I honestly feel that creates a better looking gallery. It also negates the need for tags. However, I also see that you've put a lot of time and effort into the article, so it's all good. Take care! Jay D. Easy (talk) 21:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The images loaded up blank on my computer (Mac/Firefox). That's why I reverted. Bongolian (talk) 21:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I figured! The article needed a cache purge for the images to show, which I was about to do when I noticed your revert. I'm going to revert your revert and purge cache right away. Jay D. Easy (talk) 23:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks OK now. Bongolian (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * (I wrote this before you edited your comment above) Yeah, I also just discovered that. It doesn't appear to agree with certain set heights. The images should be visible now. Feel free to revert, though. In general I believe a "packed" gallery looks better than a default, bordered gallery – it's just that sometimes it takes some tweaking to get it right. Jay D. Easy (talk) 23:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not that picky, as long as it looks orderly and the images show up. Bongolian (talk) 00:44, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Your awesomeness knows no bounds
Shabi DOO  16:43, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Is America Going Fascist?
You might find this article written by MIT professor Daron Acemoglu (probably my favorite economist born after 1950, although Mankiw and Easterly come close). As someone observing the phenomenon outside America, I have to admit, however, that he indeed made a huge strawman when he said there are people implying that all Trump supporters are fascists. Of course there are many idiots that actually believe that, if you voted for Trump last year, you're not misguided, but you're by all means a fascist. But I don't think most Trump critics agree with this statement, you can say that Trump is a fascist without saying his all of his supporters are fascists too. I'm also not sure when he said Italians couldn't fight Fascism once Mussolini came into power. That's probably Hitler's case, but Mussolini didn't have absolute power right after he became the Duce. Still, I do find remarkable how he predicted that Trump wouldn't accept the results of the election on the exactly way he didn't. GeeJayK (talk) 16:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would seem to be part of the nature of fascism, the "compensatory cults of unity" and "collaboration with traditional elites" drags in people with some sympathy towards aspects of the fascistic whole (para-fascism). Bongolian (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Block
Hey, LGM blocked User:Moony235Wolfy but refuses to explain why (at least as far as I can see). LGM has failed to provide justification when asked. Can you have a look please? LGM cannot just say "I'm not dealing with you" when I ask him - LGM is a mod so he should explain himself when asked. Acegodfuckingdamnit 17:11, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry - didn't realise LGM was no longer a mod. Nonetheless no justification has been put forward to block this user. LGM should have at least provided reasoning - regardless of whether a mod or not. Acegodfuckingdamnit 18:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Ace, you might have more success dealing with some users by being less agressive and pissy. I don't blame LGM for putting you on her ignore list. Yeah, it will be a different story once a mod, but until then, consider a different approach maybe? Shabi  DOO  19:38, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I unblocked for now. Bongolian (talk) 19:39, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Ummm, I fail to see how anything I said in this particular case was offensive, rude or 'pissy'. I was polite, didn't swear, didn't attack anyone. I asked straightforward questions, apologised for my errors regarding LGM being a mod and made a case with another mod when it was clear LGM did not want to justify the block. So what's the problem? Acegodfuckingdamnit 19:51, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Didn't you LANCB, why is this your first edit in a month, is this your beloved sock or something? At any rate, there was enough of a "previously banned user" stench to make me not mind LGM's block very much, though the trigger was probably fired a wee bit early. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have been an RW member for 13 or so years now and have never announced I was 'leaving and never coming back'. I just get busy at times at don't have the energy to patriciate. I still check RW nearly every day and when I see someone banned for no reason then yeah I'll say something about. I am sorry this upsets you. Acegodfuckingdamnit 20:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, in this case I think the probability of there being a good reason (ban evasion) is pretty high. She’sPanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 20:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Great - then provide the diff-links and reasonings. If you can't then you don't have a justifiable block. "I think..." is not a justifiable reason for a block. Acegodfuckingdamnit 20:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * IP addresses would be better but you old guard farts don't think much of that. :p PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Cut the needless flaming. It's perfectly reasonable to ask for a reason for blocking. Bongolian (talk) 20:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * IP blocking/checking has been voted on many, many times before and always failed. Not because of 'old farts'. And as the wise Bonglian points out - questioning a block is perfectly acceptable and valid. Acegodfuckingdamnit 20:58, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware I am in the minority on this position on this Wiki. Don't care. At any rate, from my perspective the issue with LGM's block, as I said, was that "it was not time yet". It probably wasn't completely justified yet. This account however pretty obviously made a block evasion account immediately afterwards just to troll the Salon on the same subject, smelling suspiciously of a certain banned user that doesn't tend to read the links they post. So I lean towards LGM's instinct as being correct at this time. (If mods could review IP addresses, it would be more obvious at this time, but given the lack of modern tooling at this time probably a "twitchy block finger" is more correct.) A trout whack to LGM, perhaps, for being early. (A trout whack to Ace as well for starting the ol' LGM/Ace drama-llama, c'mon...) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 21:11, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * So pointing out a block was invalid is now me starting shit with LGM. I asked LGM about it, LGM ignored so I raised it with a mod. Hardly starting drama. Acegodfuckingdamnit 21:22, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Bongolian can ask, Techpriest can ask, you can ask Bongolian to ask, GC can ask, PanGalaticGargleBlaster can criticize, but you cannot ask me. I do not wish to put up with your blatant disrespect for me (considering your responses on my talk page in spite of me making yet another request to stop talking to me) and constant unwarranted personal attacks after having dealt with them too many times. 22:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry dude, if I see you make what looks like an unwarranted block I’m going to ask. Acegodfuckingdamnit 22:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no real need to engage you otherwise but if you just randomly block people without justification expect to be called out. Acegodfuckingdamnit 22:31, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Ask someone else to ask me. Don't ask me. This isn't hard. Please stop responding to me. 22:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Anyhow PanGalaticGargleBlaster is correct. I've already stated earlier my suspicions for that new user. The prose and post organization matches earlier users made as well as argumentation style (making similar right-ish talking political points, failure to address counterarguments, not good at supporting arguments with sources, etc). I imposed a 9 hour block for several reasons: so users don't waste too much energy on a suspected concern troll as they did with a prior concern troll Reefyc, and 9 hours (rather than 1 hour) is enough for that new user to react accordingly so I can see if they acted like Dunbar a while back, Reefyc a while back, etc. If I'm mistaken, surely 9 hours is only an inconvenience. 22:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * LGM is right about that, especially if they were sleeping for a lot of it. For instance, 03:00-11:43 UTC I am off my computer (mainly sleeping) the whole time, but it is inconvenient, when, from say, 13:00-21:43 UTC is pretty inconvenient. --Andrew5 (talk) 22:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * You can’t just block people on your hunch and refuse to engage. Sorry man, if you block someone randomly and no justification is given outside of “because I think so...” then I’ll call you on it. I don’t need to engage you for any other reason but that and I will do so - the same as I would any else. Acegodfuckingdamnit 22:46, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In fact as far as I can see you didn’t even give the blockee a reason. You can’t just block people based on your hunch and not even explain to them why you’ve done it - let alone me. This isn’t hard. Acegodfuckingdamnit 22:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I said stop responding to me. 23:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Can we do this…elsewhere? Let’s stop pestering Bongolian. Andrew5 mobile (talk) 23:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

IRC invite?
You have been invited to talk with J3wzus on #RationalWiki on Rizon.net. Do you except? I'll set up a time and date if your willing to, and see what is good for both of us. 13:01 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a hard no. They brag about hosting 4chan on their home page. Bongolian (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations
—cosmikdebris talk stalk 23:29, 1 December 2021 (UTC) Buena suerte! Good luck! By the way, thanks for the supportive, if hircinous, words on the endorsement section. Since I was the penultimate candidate I suppose I must pay more attention. Let me know if I can help. Ariel31459 (talk) 00:24, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I did not vote but you would have been my only choice. Acei9 00:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * (oh, and Spud). Acei9 00:28, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support! Bongolian (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Larry Sanger
Not a big deal, but in my opinion the article is not suited yet for mainspace because of one single thing: it's full of Twitter links in sections where, I believe, the author still wants to develop. Other than that it looks indeed very good, but I think we should wait for at least a couple of days so Sqrt-1 can fix these issues before moving it to mainspace. Having said that, I'm not moving the article myself, just giving my opinion in case you want to reconsider that decision. GeeJayK (talk) 01:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , OK. Bongolian (talk) 02:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Reversion on AOC article
Why was this edit reverted? It wasn’t vandalism. 2607:FB90:909F:2B0E:20D6:EDC9:F908:E533 (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it wasn't vandalism. I thought it was excessive detail about AOC's personal life. See: RationalWiki is not an encyclopedia. Bongolian (talk) 18:57, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I see. I think the fact she was involved in science stuff and other laudable things at such a young age is relevant to the mission here however, yes? It debunks conservative bullshit about her. 2607:FB90:909F:2B0E:20D6:EDC9:F908:E533 (talk) 19:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, but there's two problems with that: 1) There seems to be nothing on the page about conservatives attacking her science credentials. 2) The cheerleading bit has to go: no relevance. Bongolian (talk) 19:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In addition to these reasons, the only citation provided was a link to a wikipedia page, which is not a good reference to use here. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 19:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * As mentioned in the RW article, AOC is attacked by conservatives in almost every way imaginable, ranging from her intelligence (conservatives like to act like she is stupid), to her looks (I’ve seen memes trying to compare her to a donkey, quite classy of right wingers isn’t it?), to her credentials… I used the Wikipedia reference out of convenience as Siri is of no help formatting references from my iPhone, but the sources cited by Wikipedia could be used, as well as Yorktown’s yearbook for the years she was in school. Also, the cheerleading part is relevant because an ugly loser (as conservatives make her out to be) likely would not be made a flyer. 2607:FB90:909F:2B0E:20D6:EDC9:F908:E533 (talk) 19:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It doesn't belong in the background section because it doesn't connect to to whatever point you're trying to make. If it's relevant to something that's actually on the page (and I'm not yet convinced of this), then it should go in that context. Bongolian (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies for coming in, but I do agree that the it's already clear in the article that she's well-educated, having graduated cum laude and a bachelor's degree. As for comparing her to a donkey, well, that's unfortunately par for course of politics when women are involved (this includes conservative women; remember that ugly quote that used to be on Sarah Palin's page as well this wiki comparing Ann Coulter to a horse). I mean you can talk about the typical sexist attacks on her but I do agree with Bongolian that as it stands, the information does seem too detailed and disjointed. 21:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Context of the dispute
This thread from this edit onward. 18:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Peruse at your leisure. 18:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Fundie school
That FrenchGlass user made super questionable edits on Fundie school and basically continued attempting to add the same content prior trolls did as well as goading users in edit summaries as if they're a reregger ("Did you really think that short protection was going to amount to shit?"). They've done this twice. Is there something I'm missing that you'd give them a regular welcome template rather than just blocking them indefinitely? 00:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I know right! I was flabbergasted that not one, but two sysops welcomed them. I was unsure why the heck that happened, so I didn't block them for a second time. LongStylus (talk) 00:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I wasn't sure either, so I gave the benefit of the doubt. It could be a troll was trolling itself on a separate account. I yield to your judgment on this one, . Bongolian (talk) 00:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * oops! Ariel31459 (talk) 01:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I know I a not a sysop, but I didn't say anything because I believed them that they were a Wikipedia sysop and I know they don't troll RW. But they were clearly lying.--Andrew5 (talk) 01:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism/whitewashing on "Alt-right glossary"
The last couple of edits on the "Alt-right glossary" page (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alt-right_glossary) by 79.115.136.220 appear to be a cheap attempt of whitewashing of the subject of the edits. It's been a few days and nobody has done anything about it; I'd just revert the changes myself, but I have no idea how to do it. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 72.177.230.219 / talk
 * I changed the section back to before the tone change. 14:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)


 * [EC] I saw on the source code that you tried to sign the page by creating a new line with " ". To give you some feedback on the formatting, that's usually unnecessary in MediaWiki as all you needed to do was to sign after the end of the line. You also didn't have to copy and paste the URL as typing " " is much easier and shorter to do so. As for the edits in question, GrammarCommie had reverted them so there's no need for any action on your part. 14:58, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the alert and the fix. For 72.177.230.219, in future you can go to the 'fossil record' for the page compare the changes you want to revert, then select 'undo'. Bongolian (talk) 18:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Plutocow is edit warring
I think this needs to go further. I was about to promote them over the Pinker warring. But, I knew no one would approve in the modest class of users.Ariel31459 (talk) 05:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you seriously trying to pull this card, considering you were edit warring too? You also need to stop whitewashing that article, it is undeniable that Steven Pinker has associated with Epstein in the past and has been trying to cover that up, you shouldn't add an unnecessary adjective that isn't supported by the text or references in the article. Plutocow (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Go to the talk page and face the music kid.Ariel31459 (talk) 05:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the talk page is the place to try to resolve this first. Bongolian (talk) 05:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Nixon revert
Didn't see a reason for the revert on the Richard Nixon page, just wondered why. Off-topic or unnecessary info perhaps? I can get carried away sometimes, so if that's the reason, my bad. 2A00:23C7:99A4:5000:80DC:9AE2:7F9D:47B1 (talk) 22:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * There were two reasons that I reverted. First it didn't seem particularly missional, just portraying Nixon as a weepy drunk. Second, the citation for that was not very good. There seems to be no evidence for this episode from an eyewitness. Bongolian (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was going to add that it's a disputed incident. William Safire wrote an article about the whole thing for the NYT, although he was a Nixon speechwriter, so not exactly a neutral source (https://www.nytimes.com/1976/03/29/archives/nixon-on-his-knees.html). According to Safire's piece, the claim was originally made by Woodward and Bernstein in their book The Final Days, but the attribution is a bit messy (a Kissinger aide who later denied the whole thing).


 * The other edit I made on that page made was about Kissinger, since it insinuates that he wasn't involved in Watergate, which I know is disputed by Seymour Hersh (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/06/the-craft-and-craftiness-of-henry-kissinger/304011/). Would that be OK to leave in? 2A00:23C7:99A4:5000:80DC:9AE2:7F9D:47B1 (talk) 23:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Kissinger one is fine to leave in. Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Didn't learn his lesson the first time
https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:Saloon_bar&diff=prev&oldid=2421871 Inmate XIII (talk) 23:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * And no, I'm not going to engage the troll, so don't worry about that. Inmate XIII (talk) 23:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think Robert Conquest is a very good source
He was indeed important, but his work is outdated too. You might wanna check Stalin's Curse, by Robert Gellately, or any book by Robert Service. GeeJayK (talk) 02:02, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, you can delete or replace the Conquest bit with a better reference on the Stalin page. Bongolian (talk) 02:05, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Not going to have time to do this right now, I shouldn't even be here, but I'll see what I can do later. I have an entire section on my bookshelf for 1930s Russia, pretty sure someone else has an estimative on the number. GeeJayK (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the number by Ellman is actually deaths. I'll try to clean it up based on his paper, which is at least fairly recent. Bongolian (talk) 02:14, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

You might find this useful …
This Bellingcat investigation might be interesting (if not useful). It covers QAnon and the current Ukraine crisis. Leucippus Salva veritate 21:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It's interesting, but I don't know what to make of it. Bongolian (talk) 01:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Categories
Hey, I dunno if you remember me or not but I did a lot of editing on here a few years ago. I've just started editing again, and I need a bit of a refresher - when I've added a new category to an article, how long does it take for it to show up? BJA2112 (talk)
 * It used to take at most a few minutes. Something broke in the system software though and it hasn't updated since mid-April. See: RationalWiki:Technical_support. Bongolian (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * What would it take to fix it? BJA2112 (talk) 02:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , That's outside my area of expertise. You can post on RationalWiki:Technical support. Someone there should know. User:David Gerard probably has an idea of what's involved. Bongolian (talk) 03:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

J. B. Stoner
Also, you probably noticed that I created my first new page in several years earlier, J. B. Stoner. Would you be able to help me improve it and build upon it? BJA2112 (talk) 05:37, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * {{ping|BJA2112}] It looks good overall. I did some minor cleanup, but it could use more citations. Bongolian (talk) 06:33, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Huberty
I hope there's no hard feelings regarding the page on Huberty. When you explained it the way you did, it made a lot of sense as to why it doesn't really have a place on here. And I actually didn't know about the mass shooting policy for media reporting, and that also makes sense. BJA2112 (talk) 22:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * There are absolutely no hard feelings. I appreciate that you listened to what I had to say. Bongolian (talk) 00:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello
Hi, can you give me access to edit Michael A. Woodley of Menie? I want to add sources about his recent suspension from Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Fred Jones (talk) 22:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. Bongolian (talk) 02:56, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

careful about who you block
It was an asshole who put the random numbers on the userpage after the page was created, not PanchamBro. 21:14, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thaks! Bongolian (talk) 22:14, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

How is my vote in the coop invalid?
??? 71.208.x.x (talk) 15:39, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I already reverted my edit. Bongolian (talk) 15:41, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem, I just thought it was strange. Mistakes happen. 71.208.x.x (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Paleo diet
Please do not revert edits without a reason. Fargggu (talk) 06:59, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Image captins such as that one are often used as places for snark. Bongolian (talk) 07:08, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, it's blatantly untrue. Fargggu (talk) 00:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The image caption can work either way, but I always felt the caption was supposed to invoke cave people stereotypes to ridicule the diet fad. 00:48, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Fargggu, satire is inherently untrue but it serves a purpose. If you can't detect obvious satire, perhaps you should find a satire-free wiki. Bongolian (talk) 01:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Edit to page
Only realised just now I undid one of your edits. This happens maybe once a month or two. No clue whatsoever why these undos keep happening. Must be misclicks on rollback buttons. Don't even remember visiting your talk page recently. In any case, any strange rollbacks on my part are unintentional! Shabi DOO  00:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem! Bongolian (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Zal X
Zal X is a group of past vandals of rational wiki based on the AZ vandal group and him and az raided this wiki Operater Separate from AZ but still in the group kept vandalising this wiki He then later on in April and may and of course June been planning on making a vandal move here I then betrayed him 2 months ago when he reveled it's a raid group and to take down rational wiki instead of helping it. &mdash; Unsigned, by: 54.39.32.116 / talk <small style="font-size:85%;">Requesting thread archival (why?) Bongolian (talk)

Hi! I was told that you might do me a favor... :-)
<small style="font-size:85%;">Requesting thread archival (why?) Bongolian (talk)

WBC
Ah, the good ol Westboro Baptist Loonies. I had a few run ins with them during my time living in Topeka. A shame you did too. The best one was when they picketed outside my high school graduation. 02:30, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * As awful as WBC are, they didn't really have much effect on me since I just simply walked away after cursing them. The greater personal damage comes from sociopathic family members who are often much harder to walk away from. Growing up with a sociopath makes it especially hard to even recognize them for what they are. Bongolian (talk) 14:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi, you recently rolled back an edit made to Alex Jones' page due to no citation. I was wondering if there is somewhere in the Help section you could point me towards that explains how to do that? I know little about this sort of stuff. Thanks! --BoN MKII (talk) 23:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, you can find that here: Help:References. Bongolian (talk) 23:15, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Dicksilver
You might as well revoke his D account of sysop too. 185.76.10.104 (talk) 22:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * User:D? I already did. Bongolian (talk) 22:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Bar issue
I thought I could hyperlink to a category aswell, since we don't have a "leftists who turned right with age". Turns out it added this category to the bar page and I don't know how to undo that. Really sorry about that. I didn't know this could happen. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 20:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , Plutocow already fixed it. It is done by adding a ":" at the beginning as in: Category:Leftists_who_turned_right_with_age . Bongolian (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Level 4 Janitors
What do Techs do? RationalWiki:Techs explains what permissions they have, but not what they do as techs most of the time. Is it mostly just edit filter maintenance? Rabbitseatcarrots (talk) 19:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Basically techs have the ability to do everything that moderators can do but are forewarned not to exercise certain rights that moderators have been elected to do. The main things for techs to do would be the edit filter, MediaWiki pages (primarily the Sitenotice for elections and fundraising), revision suppression (primarily for doxing an anything particularly vile), and less often other stuff that I haven't done (gadgets, interwiki). Becoming a tech was not a formality in the past but now (due to past abuse) require a request and a vote on RationalWiki:Requests for user rights. Bongolian (talk) 19:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I see, thanks. I wouldn't mind helping the wiki in those aspects, might try my luck at the basement one of these days. Rabbitseatcarrots (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Weird accounts
(Moved to RationalWiki:Technical support). Bongolian (talk) 15:31, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

ATIM for Boar and BUFO
Hey, I noticed what you said about Boar and BUFO on the current Rome Viharo AfD, and that made me decide to bring them up on All Things In Moderation. How do I broach that subject on their talk pages? --Luigifan18 (talk) 21:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, I figured it out. --Luigifan18 (talk) 21:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's been almost a full day since I put up the Atim, and I haven't been contacted by Boar or BUFO at all. If my concerns continue to go unaddressed, I plan to restore the Laird Shaw article to drive home the point that I suspect foul play and I want answers. Granted, I'm mostly suspecting foul play based on your word on the matter, but I did have my own suspicions from the start, since the very first thing that BUFO did on RationalWiki upon creating the account was to start the AfD for Laird Shaw; I was just reluctant to take anything beyond the bare minimum action of a less-than-an-hour-long block on BUFO because I felt that I would be abusing my authority as a sysop by outright deleting the AfD or blocking BUFO for a prolonged period of time. I also feel that I would be abusing my authority if I were to restore the Laird Shaw article right now, since it's been less than a day since I created the Atim as I type this, but I have prepared the following notice to post on the Laird Shaw article in the event that I decide to restore it (which I might do in about three days if my suspicions remain unaddressed) or another sysop does so in my stead:




 * I'm hoping that we don't end up having to use this, but if Boar and BUFO continue acting suspiciously and it appears that they are compromising RationalWiki's mission, I want to be ready to respond appropriately. Oh, and by the way, since this is based on your suspicions and I may or may not be [temporarily] sysoprevoked sometime soon, I would prefer if you take the lead on this.


 * (By the way, the formatting isn't working the way I'd like it to — do you have any suggestions? I think that a good template could be made out of this restoration notice I set up, to be used if any other successfully passed AfD deletion votes get called into question in the future, but I'm not sure how to do it myself.) --Luigifan18 (talk) 19:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it matters that the Laird Shaw article was deleted since ultimately he is an internet nobody. Rome Viharo is another story, and based on current voting will probably not get deleted. Viharo's non-sock account (User:RomeViharo) has no privileges and no active block, so we'll probably do nothing much about the alleged sock accounts for now. Bongolian (talk) 19:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I created the AfD on Shaw because he is vulnerable (a literal schizophrenic and suffers from other mental health problems) and he had a crappy article entirely consisting of forum quotes. It was not missional to the wiki. It was voted by 7 people to delete. Only Luigifan18 voted otherwise. For unknown reasons he has now created "Luigifan18/Restoration notice/Laird Shaw‎". Seems likes he wants to harass a vunerable individual. No surprise most people want to sysoprevoke him. I don't have any interest in further commentating here. Coincidentally, note 's stupid behaviour has also resulted in to leave. BUFO (talk) 20:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in Laird Shaw one way or the other, I just wanted to get to the bottom of the strange behavior and rule out any sinister ulterior motives on the part of BUFO and Boar. If everything's on the up and up, I'll stay my hand. --Luigifan18 (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , there really is no good reason to go ahead with that for the Laird Shaw page. Bongolian (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Very well, I'll defer to your judgment here and I won't restore the article. (I still think that the general structure of the restoration notice that I set up would make for a good template if there is ever any reason to reconsider an AfD in the future, though. I just don't quite know how to make a proper template that could be inserted into an article or talk page.) --Luigifan18 (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Request
Hi,

Is it possible you can rename these two accounts: Ben Steigmann and BenSteigmans. It has been alleged these are impersonations of RationalWiki:Articles_for_deletion/Ben_Steigmann. Orders (talk) 18:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I banned the first account based on (retroactive) ban evasion from the second account. I don't see what purpose renaming would achieve unless there's evidence of impersonation. Bongolian (talk) 19:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Define woman
While you're correct that the whole "Define woman" thing isn't just alt-right, I would argue that it's fitting to include on the page, given that it is used very frequently by the alt-right. It isn't the only thing on that page that isn't strictly alt-right (for example, "Let's Go Brandon"), and I partially acknowledged it isn't exclusive to the alt-right. ExChristian (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I already made a note of this on the talk page, FWIW. Vee (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I wasn't expecting a reply that fast, but ok, thank you. ExChristian (talk) 15:54, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Can we have a citation of someone in the alt-right using the phrase? Bongolian (talk) 17:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Would Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, or any other Daily Wire wingnut count as alt-right? They literally made a documentary called "What is a Woman". ---Ozzyboo (talk) 17:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Those three are not good examples — none are identified as alt-right on their respective pages. It's even noted on Shapiro's page that he's a critic of the alt-right. Bongolian (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * They may not be part of the alt-right proper, but they are certainly part of the same reactionary tradition. Vee (talk) 17:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, Ben Shapiro and the other cranky trolls are all noted as "alt-lite" on their respective articles (which as Vee notes is part of the same tradition), and Matt Walsh even calls himself a "theocratic fascist" (possibly ironically, but still worth noting). ExChristian (talk) 18:57, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, it's reasonable to add with explanation. Bongolian (talk) 19:05, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Delete account
Is it possible to have my account and userpages deleted, I'm unsure how to contact anyone privately. &mdash; Unsigned, by: ConCass / talk / contribs
 * I can delete your home page, but our policy is to keep your contributions and talk page. Bongolian (talk) 07:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Why did you remove this from Obama article and call it vandalism?
Daniel Ellsberg, Jenifer Bolen, Noam Chomsky, Alexa O'Brien, US Day of Rage, Kai Wargalla, and Icelandic MP Hon. Birgitta Jonsdottir joined Hedges in suing the Obama administration.https://www.occupy.com/article/hedges-v-obama-fighting-militarized-state#sthash.6T9BHpGo.dpbs Bob-smith (talk) 18:40, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not what I removed. What I removed was this, which was at best not an improvement. Bongolian (talk) 18:48, 20 November 2022 (UTC) If you were also the BoN who did the other edits, well it did seem like more of the same. It looks to me like Hedges ultimately lost the case though the text is still based on his initial success. Bongolian (talk) 18:53, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Volodymyr Zelesnkyy article
You left a message in the Volodymyr Zelesnkyy revision page where you said, "This page still needs a lot of work", I was wondering what else needs there to be improved as I want to make sure its a good quality article for Rational Wiki. Snake101201 (talk) 08:38, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a curious tendency to incorrectly use the auxiliary verb 'would' when a simple past tense would suffice. There's an excess of non-missional details in some cases, for example it's hard to see what is missional about his acting work other than Servant of the People. There's also a parallel universe observation to be made between Zelenskyy's rise to power and Putin's rise. Putin was not an actor, but he was initially chosen by oligarchs to be modeled after a popular TV character (Vladimir Putin). I'm not saying it should go back into draft, just that it needs more work. Bongolian (talk) 17:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Auxiliary verb: Well I am not a grammar expert so I did not notice.
 * Mission: I understand what you mean by that, but I included just for informational reasons.
 * Zelenskyy's rise to power: Zelensky is not like other people, he really does not necessary have a "rise to power". I mean all he did was get elected and its not as detailed like Hitler's rise to power.


 * I also understand your criticisms and will continue working on the article to make sure its a good quality article for Rational Wiki. I also just have one question, how come the article does not appear in the search engine? I mean new Rational Wiki articles that are created recently have them but not for Zelensky's page? Snake101201 (talk) 06:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your understanding. I don't know why you don't see the article in the search engine because I do see it there. You do mean the RationalWiki search engine, right, not some third party search engine? Bongolian (talk) 07:58, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * No I mean Google search engine, because its a mainspace article. Snake101201 (talk) 09:04, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean now. It should show up eventually. It used to be that anyone could submit a site for indexing on Google; nowadays it has to be the site administrator. Wait a month and see. Bongolian (talk) 17:21, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok thx got it. Snake101201 (talk) 00:49, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Um, I just saw a username that might be problematic.
I was looking over the recent changes, and I saw that someone had registered an account under the name of "Engaging in heterosodomy" a few hours ago. That got a raised eyebrow from me, but I'm not sure whether or not it's actually offensive enough to be worth blocking. Do you have any advice? --Luigifan18 (talk) 04:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I also just noticed an account named "Abolish Ukraine". The nerve of some people. 😔 Luigifan18 (talk) 04:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

You are mentioned in the coop, don't worry it's nothing bad though
King Bowser K. Rool (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The coop case wasn’t just a matter of curiosity, it was a matter of wanting to make sure I was in line blocking his two alt accounts. You may wish to put the alt accounts in sysoprevoke as well (which I cannot do). King Bowser K. Rool (talk) 03:30, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * For those of us who were around then, I don't think there was any question that they were socks. I'll add the sysoprevoke. Bongolian (talk) 03:41, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

NUMBEROFEXISTINGARCHIVES
Don't actually set this value for counter for Inferno Bot. It should be set to the amount of existing archive pages, it'll just result in the bot not archiving that page at all if you set it to this value. -- Techpriest (talk) 16:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * OK. Bongolian (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Putin IS a racist
Why did you revert? &mdash; Unsigned, by: 2607:fb91:1996:5b53:3cde:4ce8:d342:9ed1 / talk / contribs
 * We already call him a racist on that page. You gave no citation for your claim ("Putin is openly racist against black people."), which is plausible but where is the evidence? Bongolian (talk) 02:05, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Antidepressant article may require moderator attention.
I have noticed in the recent changes over 58 changes on the antidepressant article being made to change the article into stating antidepressants are ineffective or comparable to placebo; but I noticed that some the claims being introduced are not actually supported by some the sources referenced or they explicitly reference drug myths without citation. You have been able to spot the quality of meta-analyses in the past; and edit articles to more strongly reflect the strength of evidence and as a moderator I take it you’d be interested in fact checking these changes. Anyways obviously no obligations here just thought I would bring it to your attention. The edits are raising red flags for me — because they are utilizing talking points I have seen criticized by other scientific skeptics before. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As an example of a red flag some of the studies being referenced are from “open-access” journals which have a reputation for being a little less reliable as far as academic sources go. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am already finding sources complicating the narrative being pushed on the antidepressant article . Sorry for the notification dump but I am just finding 58+ edits from a BoN being patrolled by other users and the work required to verify and fact check the new edits a bit overwhelming. I thought if I at least get an editor I trust attention on the issue something can at least be coordinated to effectively respond to these edits. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It looks like and  have already taken a look at some of the edits. I'm not sure I have time to look at it much detail today. Bongolian (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not qualified to talk about the subject, but I believe these edits were made by Neiltyson1fan for a couple of reasons. First, because of the sheer number of edits. Second, because they said in their talk page that their work is in public domain (which I believe it's not necessary since we use CC-BY-SA 3.0). Neil had the same message. Third, because Neil were also very skeptical on psychiatry as a science. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 20:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the IP range for 3 weeks based on that. The BoN is a nuisance for patrolling regardless. Bongolian (talk) 21:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to go ahead andreverting the whole thing. While I'm also not terribly qualified to talk about the subject, it seems the edits this BoN is making is either over-activist oriented, baffling and without sources, or poorly framed. Example:
 * A) "SSRIs were meant to cover up failure of benzos" -- this section is a paper by, who is by and large is an anti-pharmaceutical activist who is also pro-Electroconvulsive therapy. I'm less against the inclusion of Healy and other anti-psychotropic drug folks (it is good to have something on the activists) than the framing; Healy is as far as I can tell is very controversial in the field, so that should be noted.
 * B) "Depressed patients may have increased serotonin" -- the paper he linked to compared serotonin turnover between those with major depressive disorder (MDD) on SSRIs, those without, and healthy individuals. Those with MDD not on SSRIs had higher turnover than the healthy individuals, but SSRIs actually reduced turnover to the healthy individual level. The conclusion that reducing turnover is directly contradictory to a drug that reduces uptake really makes no sense.
 * C) Why did the BoN remove the Wiki link in the Types section to insert "almost all medications prescribed as antidepressants are an SRI"? I mean, it's safe to say as this link does that "SSRIs are the most widely prescribed type of antidepressants", pretty lazy not to Google. And what is that unsourced  "Some of the earlier antidepressants were developed using similar hypotheses to the controversial 'therapy by electronically induced seizure' section?
 * D) Another unsourced opinon: replacing "their lower incidence of side effects" with "because it is harder to commit suicide via overdose using them than with previous drugs thereby preventing lawsuits". Drugs are made safer entirely to prevent lawsuits? Ok.
 * E) The BoN removed an (admittedly not well written) "Controversies" section as well as a section on "happy pills" (again, a not well written paragraph) with some Bill O'Reilly Youtube link.
 * I think there actually is a lot of controversy over the "serotonin hypothesis" now, but you can't come in and only focus on the negatives, while also completely ignoring recent developments (eg research into the role of glutamine in depression). In my opinion. BobJohnson (talk) 21:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, good. Bongolian (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I barely read the edits. I just wanted to deal with the red exclamation spam. 21:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * OK. Bongolian (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Note to self
Coming out in March:
 * Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right by Matthew Dallek

Bongolian (talk) 18:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Honesty and admission
Hey, I'm new here. I've lurked here for past 2 or so years.

Anyway, is honesty ok here, even when some of my views are not missional (not PC, racist) and flawed? Is also it ok when I clarify them? ASerb (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It looks like you already did in the Saloon. You are welcome to express your opinion in the Saloon and on talk pages as long as it stays within the bounds of civility. Bongolian (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Donald Trump child rape cases Gallery section
Hey mate, I see that you rescinded my user rights and called my edits garbage. I didn't get a chance to vote on its deletion because the vote ended within a few hours, but I just wanted to show you that I posted the same gallery to Imgur, and it's currently trending #1 Most Viral on their front page. Link here Cheers! Enix150 (talk) 04:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) You had claimed copyright ownership for most or all of those images: a near impossibility unless you were present at them. 2) The text was potentially libelous, as others have pointed out, so needed to be deleted quickly. 3) We don't care what you do on imagur. 4) You can still edit here if you so desire, but we won't tolerate potentially libelous content. Bongolian (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you gotta be super careful when discussing shit like that, especially when it’s someone as litigious and petty as Trump. 05:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * DuceMoosolini Yes, I agree, that is why I was careful to cite sources for every claim, so as to avoid any origination stemming from RW. Enix150 (talk) 05:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) All images were already in public domain from the other wikis, and RW didn't have an upload option for "already in public domain", so I claimed them as original work to be directly put back into public domain, as is standard across wikis without these plugins. 2) I understand how it could be construed that way, but it was all cited, so the libel would be on the original article writers rather than us here citing it. Zero legal liability on our part here at RW. 3) I was trying to direct traffic back to this site by linking to it in the Imgur image descriptions, but that was made difficult by the deletion of the page I was redirecting them to! 4) OK. Enix150 (talk) 05:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If they're demonstrably in the public domain, you should have selected public domain as an option and also included a link for evidence that it was put into public domain by the copyright holder. The images were all guilt by association, so don't show anything other than that these people were photographed together at some event. Big whoop: I saw  that doesn't make me a criminal. Bongolian (talk) 05:25, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll be sure to do that next time. It may be guilt by association, but if I saw you laughing it up and being buddy-buddy with Mobutu Sese Seko, and even filmed you discussing a coup with him, then yeah I might reconsider your criminality? If it looks like a duck, and it quacks very publicly like a duck... People have the right to consider whether it might just be a duck? Enix150 (talk) 05:48, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You showed those people laughing together, didn't have evidence of what they said or did, or even when they were together. It's poor evidence of anything except that they met. Bongolian (talk) 06:05, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The court cases and sworn testimony from the multiple witnesses mentioned in these cases are surely enough to be considered. Showing footage of them together to confirm their friendship and the plausibility of this story is exactly what you would do in court. Enix150 (talk) 06:18, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * These remain allegations until proven in a court of law. There are no active court cases that I am aware of other than that of E. Jean Carroll. Wikipedia has a page on which would be a more advisable name for the page if you're going to try to lump all these together. Bongolian (talk) 06:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You … didn't have evidence of what they said or did – which is why I removed the post with the link. Apologies Bongolian, but I didn't think there should be free publicity on your talk page until you approved it. (I'm on Australian time and I didn't know how long it would be before you saw it.) Edger Halogen (talk) 06:30, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Re: Deadnaming
I had to employ creative formatting with the link given it was interrupted by an editorial comment (as indicated by square brackets and italics, like the comment about Soros later in the blockquote). I was trying to strike a balance between not deadnaming a trans person and accurately quoting the text of the book (thus the omission was noted by an editorial comment). I'm not particularly attached to any formatting, but the idea of having a single link with a note about the deadnaming might work. I'm still retired and can't edit my own talk page since I protected it before relinquishing my admin tools. I was discussing Joyce with a friend earlier, and couldn't remember offhand all the billionaires she names, so I checked out the Helen Joyce article and noticed the quote had been modified. Nope Rocket (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * , I revised that part to avoid deadnaming but also to call attention to Joyce's deadnaming. Let me know if that's OK.
 * Looks good. Concise and clear. Nope Rocket (talk) 00:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! Bongolian (talk) 00:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, would it be possible for to have my talk page unprotected? I'm not sure I want to be as active as I was, but this would make things easier should I choose to. Nope Rocket (talk) 05:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Done. Bongolian (talk) 05:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Nope Rocket (talk) 05:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Can I be demoted again? I promoted myself in frustration a while back. Mainly I need to move a page so I can fix an error I made in misspelling the name of the subject of an article I'm writing. I suppose I could ask someone else do do it for me, but it would probably be simpler if I had a mop to clean up my own messes. Nope Rocket (talk) 07:07, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Done. Bongolian (talk) 07:16, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks again! Nope Rocket (talk) 07:17, 1 April 2023 (UTC)