User talk:Bongolian

''' Attention trolls: Don't bother me here. I am busy impersonating on. '''

Request
Please don’t ban me. I know I ignored orders not to make the categories, but I was impatient and I didn’t get a clear answer on whether I could make the categories or I couldn’t. Rational Dude (talk) 13:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I proposed topic ban on ATIM, not a total ban. I noticed that you've seen this now. Bongolian (talk) 17:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I already saw this a while ago. I will do my best not to fiddle with the categories after this, but I have a thing with categorizing because of my ocd, which can be a good or a bad thing depending on the situation. Rational Dude (talk) 20:54, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Problematic article
See Talk:Whiteness 216.238.112.192 (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Para-fascists
Would it be a good idea to bring back the category? There are some people who can be categorized as para-fascists, like marine le pen and dick cheney, just to name a few. Rational Dude (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Technically we already have "alt-right" and "alt-lite". Dick Cheney is also a piece of shit but he's a neocon, not a neo-fascist. Also Le Pen is already categorized as a fascist, so there's no need for the para-fascist category. Carthage (talk) 20:53, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright. But dick cheney does have some legitimate authoritarian characteristics. Rational Dude (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * There's a difference between authoritarianism and fascism. Cheney's not a populist. Fascists like Trump, Le Pen, and Meloni are. Carthage (talk) 21:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The para-fascist category is too vague, so is open to dispute. Bongolian (talk) 22:29, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Kane/Smith/CancelWatch
Kane is full of BS. Cancel Watch already deleted their Twitter page to try to cover their tracks after it was reported to police for blackmail. Search: @watch_cancel (its gone) but note they linked to it on their blog. Their blog is not a reliable source of info but disinformation. 134.209.162.227 (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Reply to your comment
I apparently still don't have sufficient permissions to edit the Emily Willoughby talk page, so I'm posting in your user talk to reply to your comment here:

With regard to the notability issue for both Willoughby and Kane, I would argue that they are both quite notable for RationalWiki. Not because they wrote a book of modest popularity against creationism but because the are former young Earth creationists who wrote a book against creationism. They are comparable in that regard to Britt Marie Hermes, a naturopathic doctor who very publicly turned against naturopathy.

If the articles about Emily and myself could be primarily about our being ex-creationists who transformed into critics of creationism, instead of primarily about Wikipedia drama, neither of us would really object to being the subjects of RationalWiki articles. But in their current state, these articles are mostly not about the thing that makes us notable.

I think the article about Jerry Coyne is a good model here. That article mentions his "anti-woke" activism, but it isn't primarily about that, because that isn't the main thing Coyne is known for.

If you think this is a good idea, I could provide some sources (mostly about our book) that discuss our anti-creationism work. I mean actual published sources, not Tweets or Wikipedia diffs. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 06:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I just checked your permissions (autopatrolled) and the page protection of Talk:Emily Willoughby (allow autopatrolled). I don't see why you can't edit there. BobJohnson said that the Wikidrama needs to be deleted, and I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Bongolian (talk) 06:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know what's causing the problem, but when I try to edit that talk page, it gives an error message saying this: "This page has been locked. You have insufficient permissions to edit."


 * I'm glad we're agreed that the Wikipedia drama should be deleted from Willoughby's page (and presumably also mine). But because of my personal connection to Willoughby, I don't think I should make those changes myself. Could someone else do it?


 * Also, would you like me to provide some sources about our anti-creationism work? --Tetrapteryx (talk) 06:39, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I think I've figured out why I can't edit that article's talk page. This diff says the article's protection level is, "Allow only autoconfirmed users". And you gave me the autopatrolled status, not the autoconfirmed status.


 * The latest comment there from Bob M is agreeing with you, me and BobJohnson that the article doesn't reflect what Willoughby is known for. But if I were to try rewriting that article myself, it might create a problem that I won't have the technical ability to discuss any of my changes on the talk page. : would any of you be willing to make the agreed-upon changes, to her article and/or mine?


 * On the other hand if you feel that it's up to me to make the necessary changes, please let me know that, so that I won't end up waiting indefinitely for someone else to do it. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 21:52, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Once you have ten edits, you should be granted the autoconfirmed status. Plutocow (talk) 21:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay. Do you and Bongolian recommend that I wait until I have ten edits, and then make the agreed-upon changes to those articles myself? As I said, I'm wary about heavily editing an article about myself or about someone I know in real life (doing that is strongly discouraged at Wikipedia), but I'll do it if it's what the other people here think I should do. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It's best not to edit the page of someone with whom one is closely associated. Commenting on the associated talk page is generally fine. Bongolian (talk) 01:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying that. In that case, could you please try improving the Willoughby article yourself (as well as the one about me)? We seem to be in agreement about what sorts of changes need to be made, but I don't think those changes ever will actually be made to the articles unless you make them. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 02:16, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Could you please look at this?
Sorry if I'm annoying you by how much I'm posting here, but could you please look at this discussion? Johns seems to have copied some material into the article about me that was originally authored by Oliver Smith, which misrepresents its source, I assume because while copying it into that article Johns didn't look carefully at whether the source supports it. However, based on your comments above, I assume it would be best if I didn't remove this material myself. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 15:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)