User talk:Bongolian/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 21 January 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<2>, <3>, <4>

, (new)(back)

Demotion

Oh dear, you've gone and been consistently constructive. Your punishment awaits. Grab a mop. MarmotHead (talk) 19:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Userspace

Short of bigotry and the illegalities, things in userspace aren't touchable by other users; it's meant to be that users space, and either way it shouldn't be going through AFD anyways.--Miekal 01:36, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. But it doesn't make sense to have regular page links redirected there. In this case mitochondria. --Bongolian (talk) 06:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Minor edits

I note that most of your edits are tagged as "minor". This is intended for spelling/grammar corrections and the like. Substantial additions such as this (addition of link & image) ain't minor. If you've got "Mark all edits minor by default" selected in your preferences may I suggest that you deselect it? Cheers! Scream!! (talk) 07:33, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the tip. I'll restrict my use of "minor edit" in the future then. Bongolian (talk) 13:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Rick Perry

Can you clarify what's going on with Rick Perry? I didn't understand your edit but obviously I don't want to revert what I don't understand. Ikanreed (talk) 21:49, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, I have added to the comment. A judge refused to dismiss the felony charges against him. Bongolian (talk) 21:57, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

You did this on purpose right

[1]

(cur | prev) 21:24, 6 February 2015‎ Bongolian (Talk | contribs | block)‎ . . (+666)‎ . . (quote; links; Is it hot here or is it just me?) (undo)

--Ymir (talk) 22:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Yup he did. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 22:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually, it was a happy accident! Bongolian (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Breastfeeding

Thanks for the good copy editing and adding links. ShabiDOO 10:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, glad you appreciate it! Bongolian (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Science programs

Why did you gut the article? Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 19:27, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

The deleted text was mainly lifted directly from the BJU website, hence likely a copyright violation given its length. If it can be turned into a critique with excerpts from the BJU website that should be fine. Bongolian (talk) 20:14, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hinduism template

Hi, I have removed the Hinduism template from Hindutva related articles. Hindutva is a polical ideology and different from Hinduism which is a religion. --ThisIsYeah (talk) 08:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

thanks

for the clean-up of my misspelling of "Chuck Berry." And that was pretty fast too. Carptrash (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

EvoWiki

Want curator? Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 22:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Sure, thanks! Bongolian (talk) 23:29, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Unusual, I know

Rarely does anyone seem to say thank you around here, but I will. Thanks for running your eye over Abu Bakar Bashir‎. --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 01:24, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Main

Re your recent edit to Purported legal highs; FYI there's a template {{main|pain}} that gives:

See the main article on this topic: pain

(Yes I am sitting here bored and with nothing better to do) Scream!! (talk) 13:06, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

ok, thanks! Bongolian (talk) 16:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Tobacco

I reverted your rollback, can you explain your reasoning for doing it in the first place? TheAtheistComrade (talk) 02:44, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes I just posted to your talk page regarding this. Bongolian (talk) 02:47, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Kopi luwak

I appreciate the work you put into the article making it mainspace-able. Thanks! --ShabiDOO 19:36, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome (Kembali)! Bongolian (talk) 19:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Reminder

When you port EvoWiki articles, be sure to edit the EvoWiki-side article to say {{rw|name of RW article}}. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 04:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

eg, http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/What_use_is_half_an_eye%3F. Thanks! Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 04:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

This helps with stuff like Why is creationism not a scientific theory? so it doesn't get ported twice Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 04:47, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I have fixed things up on the EvoWiki side now that I have an account there. Bongolian (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!

I don't know how many times you've fixed my sloppy-ish contributions, but it's more than once! Thanks! Now, can you help me get tenure? MarmotHead (talk) 16:06, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, MarmotHead. If I could help you get tenure, I probably wouldn't be here! Bongolian (talk) 17:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Please take the next step in the AfD process you've started

Please go back to Black Jesus and follow the instructions under the delete template. Thank you. Spud (talk) 04:52, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

The page has already been deleted. Bongolian (talk) 06:31, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

—

Your — recent — edit — was — very — into — it — ;P — Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 03:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

After one learns the hammer of typography, one must use it! Bongolian (talk) 04:01, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

diny

I have no idea what it means either. The same person also provided the quote on GMO ... Maybe it's hardcore neohippie slang, or something. Carpetsmoker (talk) 20:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

The Urban Dictionary has a definition, but it seems to make no sense in context.[2] Bongolian (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Person template

You made me panic for a minute with this, as I'm running a bot to add {{person}} to all the talkpages (for a minute I thought it was crapping up mainspace pages). At any rate, I believe that the person template is intended only for talk pages, and not the main page? That's what TheroadtoWiganPier told me, anyway... Carpetsmoker (talk) 14:17, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, I missed that message. I will cease adding {{person}} to mainspace. Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 16:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Something seems to have gong wrong with the license

Of File:Printer daemon.jpg. Carpetsmoker (talk) 08:08, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me. I have added a license. Bongolian (talk) 17:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Standards

The plan was to apply "Yes" / "No (Field)" to everyone based on their field first, then sort out people like d'Abrera who don't actually qualify, so there will be false positives. Thanks for all your help!! FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 05:12, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks & you're welcome! Bongolian (talk) 05:17, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Everyone's sorted by field. Now, education and LP will be a blast. Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 06:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Blonks

Ah, k. Was just curious if I missed something, 'cause from what I saw the issue with the guy with the multi-word name (Croll Donut etc.) was spamming a paper on a talk page rather than blanking.ℕoir LeSable (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

IP vandal bin deal

I got warned for vandal binning IP addresses, because apparently one day years in the future a good decent person might possible make good faith edits from that exact address, even though it was previously used as a troll account. Check the bottom of my talk page. Apparently you're not supposed to. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 22:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I have paroled the IP. Seems like the instructions on blocking users are rather inviting towards vandal binning repeat offenders though. Bongolian (talk) 22:52, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Pharmacology and nutrition, eh?

Hey good buddy! I read on your user page that you're quite science literate and interested in herbal supplements and nutrition (meaning: you know to apply that same scientific scepticism to those topics). As do I! Nice to hear I'm not the only drug/medicine/supplement/nutrition geek on the site. Anyways, this is an uncomfortable truth which we can't disregard any longer. We need to rethink and possibly merge some of our articles I mention in that discussion, getting atleast one of them to actually meet gold standards (due to the obvious importance of the topic of debunking all the crap herbal/nutritional woo claims). And I don't see how we could keep our current Herbal supplement article as frontpage with a straight face. It's literally near-pseudoscientific at this point. Anyhow, join the discussion buddy. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Percy! I think you hit the nail on the head with the Herbal supplement page. I'm glad that it is now demoted. User:Krej (especially on birthwort) and User:FuzzyCatPotato have also done some good work on herbs. Bongolian (talk) 18:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Boring story

The citation on your userpage reminds me of a time in elementary school about 5 or 6 years ago when I used to eat these sour weeds that would grow everywhere. Everyone would tell me that the reason they were sour was because dogs would piss on them. Now as I look at the text on your userpage, as well as the text I am writing, I'm hoping to god that it wasn't true'Legion^{what do you want from me} 08:15, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

It's not the piss I'd be worrying about! Bongolian (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Well what should I be worrying about?!'Legion^{what do you want from me} 23:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Given a choice of urine therapy or feces therapy, I would go with number one. Other than that eating random weeds is not a good idea as some of them could be poisonous. Bongolian (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Well I hope some kid happens to stumble upon this conversation to learn a very valuable piece of advise: don't eat random weeds you find growing in Oakland,CA'Legion^{what do you want from me} 01:10, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Fluoride Stare

Hey buddy! First of all, the fact that the cranks have even coined the phrase "flouride stare" is absolutely hilarious. I love it. Secondly; check out the fossil record of the Water Fluoridation article starting from the 22nd of November 2015. I've poured a little bit of love into this article, and I'd love to see it improve even more in quality, perhaps with a long-term future goal of reaching front page? Regardless of that - I think that the new article on the fluoride stare belongs as a sub-section in the water fluoridation article. Would you agree with me that it could reasonably be marked as a duplicate and voted to be merged? It would make my day, as frankly, the main water fluoridation needs to grow in my opinion. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey Percy! You've been doing some great work overall! I will give Fluoride another read-through, but I'm not sure that I can personally improve it much. Yes, I think the "stare" should be moved as a subsection; it's not likely to ever be more than a stub on its own. Best regards, Bongolian (talk) 21:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Regarding my article (The one on Jeane Dixon)

So can you help me list some major points on it that need to be sourced? Or what if they came from Wikipedia, mainly? (I rephrased the info, of course.) Can I use other source(s) that tell of similar info to cite? Thanks!^{— Unsigned, by: Webshite hunter / talk / contribs}

You can use Wikipedia references, especially if you check them. Using Wikipedia as a source is not so good since it's better to use primary references and Wikpedia is a secondary reference. Bongolian (talk) 15:22, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for RationalMedia board election

You've been nominated to the RationalMedia Foundation election. Please accept or decline here; if you accept, you may wish to campaign.

Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 01:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The Passion of the Snark

Sup buddy. Can't believe I read that report and wrote what is basically a word for word debunk. Having done so, on the other hand... You mind sneaking a peek? All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:18, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Percy! Quite a coincidence. I will reply on the Ayurveda talk page. Good luck with the election. Bongolian (talk) 22:08, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks champ! You too! And to think I used to consult Ayurveda and wear an arsenic-coated beaver vest on the bus every day for a year. Cured my youth, it did. Thanks, WHO! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, most of us have done foolish things in our youth! I consulted John Lust's The Herb Book in my youth — fortunately not for anything serious. Bongolian (talk) 22:43, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

I have to just come clean now and say that I was really actually joking when I said I wore an arsenic-coated beaver vest on the bus every day for a year. I also never consulted Ayurveda in my life, ever. I did, however, consult Alex Jones at one point in my life... Guuuh. Makes me almost wish it was the beaver thing instead, honestly. All the best anyways, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

OK, I can't top you on that. The worst I listened to was Dave Emory. Bongolian (talk) 00:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Just a happy little accident

Am I mistaken, or is it the case that your original message just got a teetsy-tiny bit misconstrued just now? All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:59, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, a bit misconstrued. I have commented there. Thanks! Bongolian (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for running!

See the main article on this topic: RationalWiki:2016 board of trustees election/Results

Thanks for running in the 2016 RMF board election and adding some movement to turgid electoral waters. I believe that you were a great candidate and a good editor, and you gained my vote (or at least part of it, given STV rules). And, if you so desire, better luck next time! Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 20:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Fuzzy. I think a very good group of candidates won. Bongolian (talk) 20:46, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for running, buddy. While I was in the lucky position of being able to honestly endorse every running candidate, I will confess that I ranked you pretty high in my vote. And you know what? By running, you and Owlman made the election worthwhile (as we'd have 5 people for 5 seats otherwise). And that's no small undertaking. For that, I thank you both. You both earned this. Now, as for my part, I promise I'll do my best not to muck things up too badly around here. All the best, your friend Reverend Black Percy (talk) 23:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Percy, I actually voted for you above myself. I think that a very good group of candidates won, including yourself. Bongolian (talk) 23:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I did the same for you, champ! Also, from one thing to the other — great job getting the Marijuana woo article started! Proud of ya, keep it up. Also, I assume you've read the internet's best comprehensive science article on marijuana? I've read it top-to-bottom thrice now (in a year or so). More info here. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

I actually had not seen this site before. They seem to soft pedal risks, so I'm not quite sure what to make of them. E.g., take a look at their ECA stack page.[3] They don't mention anything about heart attacks, etc. Bongolian (talk) 05:23, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

I also endorsed every candidate, and I believe that you did a great job.-D1@m0ndD15c1 (talk) 05:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

@Bongolian Regarding their ECA article; that's because their editorial staff always treats pre-made stacks as fork pages. Let me show you. See their article on ZMA (6 refs lol) versus their actual articles on zinc (271 sources), magnesium (215 sources) and vitamin B6 (59 sources). Same with the ECA page you linked (20 puny sources); while their ephedrine article has 98 sources (with a huge ass warning about exactly the thing you mention at the top of that article) and their caffeine article comes with a whopping 423 sources. Aspirin is not covered as it is not considered a supplement, but an actual medicine. I hope this helped buddy; it's a great site. I'd love your thoughts. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 10:51, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

New to Examine.com?

I saw you say you'd never seen the site before, so I'd like to give you the minor tour. Here's a little about them and their editors. After reading that, I'd recommend you start off here; it's a summary on who they are and what they've accomplished thus far. Keep in mind that just like a Wiki of sorts (and like science in general), they are always compiling information. They even have a mechanism open to the public where enthusiasts (such as yourself) may inform them of studies that you believe they should analyse for content.

Here's a little something on their hiring process. Here — crucially — we see both their stance on objectivity, and an actual push-came-to-shove example of their scientific practices (in regards to their article in The Guardian).

Also, please consider viewing their most referenced articles (besides their Marijuana article, which is the #2 most researched article on their entire site and the single most researched scholarly resource on cannabis on the web today! Very important for our Marijuana woo article! Also, they did a minor blog piece on marijuana and apetite that may be relevant for that too).

These other links I'd like to give as examples of their relative excellence include their articles on fish oil, garlic, vitamin E, vitamin K and caffeine (just to name a few). Make sure you click around a little in their so-called "Human Effect Matrix", pressing "See all studies" to quickly access study abstracts and relevant information like trial length, sample size and blinding (or lack of it). Also notice their pedagogic grading system for study quality (on human studies) — it also says something about their rigor, since they only consider, quote "Robust research conducted with repeated double-blind clinical trials" as top-quality research.

For an overview of their "most popularly searched" supplements vs their "most well sourced" articles, see here. Examples of their great skeptical pieces include debunking detoxes and discussing herbal supplement content. They also discuss what research has taught us in the past five years, keeping their viewpoint comprehensive as well as up to date.

You're clearly very interested in this sort of stuff (as am I) based on your Birthwort and Marijuana woo articles. My main reference point for most of my supplement information comes from Examine.com, as they simply have the best compilations on most things, and follow a rigorously scientific approach. I'm not saying your world will be rocked by this site, as it's meant to help everyone and not just professionals find their way, but I hope that you will atleast bookmark it and make sure to check it out in addition to your existing sources when compiling data and conclusions for your other health-related stuff. All the best my friend, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 10:44, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Percy. They do seem to be rather thorough. I'm not an expert on marijuana by any means. Basically, I stumbled upon some pot shop claims, and thought that would be a good starting point for the article. Bongolian (talk) 17:35, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Shroud of turin

Hi, You can call me Peter, or jety. "Coincidences basically." I couldn't decipher your first sentence, but I do appreciate the edit. If you meant "coincidences don't count", well, what does that even mean? "This needs a more expansive critique to be included" Would a well-written, expansive skeptical article do?

Hi Peter. You don't need to write a whole article. Just write a couple of sentences on what the claimed evidence is, give some idea on how convincing this is (e.g. comparison of the estimated ages of the two shrouds, and give any counter-evidence if there is any. Also please sign your post to talk pages with "~~~~" which appears below as a shorthand for your name and timestamp. Bongolian (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It's an ancient christian artifact: a bloodied face-mask of a crucified man. I'll make my due diligence before making any new edits to the article. Should I include my nickname in the nowiki tag? ~~~~

Wo(r)t I think

I think Birthwort deserves more than a mention under "See also" in the Appeal to ancient wisdom article, but indeed a mention here under its own novel headline, e.g. "In herbalism". Thoughts? All the best, buddy Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:25, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I agree expansion is warranted. Best to you too. Bongolian (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Your wish is my command

Voilà!--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 15:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Stellar Metamorphosis

Thank you for the Bronze and additional edits! I have been working on it for a long time now, and it is mostly ignored here.Roo (talk) 15:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Asbestos

Please see the talk page on the asbestos article.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 07:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

You've been nominated as a moderator

You've been nominated in the upcoming moderator elections. See the nomination at RationalWiki:Moderator elections/Nominations.

Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 02:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Some nitpicking

I noticed this, and I couldn't help but react to the use of your phrase "fake panic".

As a non-professional trained as an analytic philosopher (of sorts), I can't help but read that as "false panic" (read: "non-panic"), when what you seem to be meaning is more akin to a manufactroversy, a moral panic, or just general GOP FUD. As a result, your list comes off as sounding way more "conspiratorial" than I think you intend it to.

What about, instead of it saying "Create fake crime panic" and "Create fake voter fraud panic", it would say something like "Play on fears of crime/voter fraud" or "Whip up panic over crime/voter fraud"? Even just "Create crime panic" and "Create voter fraud panic", removing the word "fake". "Fake panic" makes it sound like it's not a panic they're creating, but they are, so... Yeah.

I'm a little much right now but I mean well. Just saying. All the best champ, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Percy. I'll change it. It was a rough draft anyway. Bongolian (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

(also the pizza helped) Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:56, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

There was an attempt

Please read this (provided "as-is"), perhaps as a sign that delirium is near. Also, I hope I don't come off sounding like Duane Gish in that post... I really tried to get my own bearings throughout, but my fever is so high, I basically have the composure of Boris Jeltsin with a concussion. I hope it finds you well, anyhow. All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

No, you weren't coming off like Gish. A high fever is dangerous; don't wait till the last minute to see a medical professional! Take care, pal!

Nice video of Boris; it explains rather simply how Putin took power. Bongolian (talk) 20:19, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: Vitamin C

If you happen to have the time and interest, I'd actually love to hear your skeptical view on the source dump I provided above. Y'know, I'm not saying "sit through it all", per se, but I'm interested to know if there's any real benefits or any real risks in supplementing Vitamin C — you know; the basic info that any sane person wants to have about things they pay money for and indeed consume (outside of what I've already gathered from skimming the sum of the sources I provided there). Just as a thought bubble. But it's fine if you don't want to or whatever, no hard feelings, etc. All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:52, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin C were reviewed by the US Institute of Medicine in 2000.[4] The RDA (total minimum intake to avoid disease) that they recommended for men was 90 mg/day for adult men and 75 mg/day for adult women (+ an addition 35 mg/day for smokers). The Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) that they recommend is 2000 mg/day, above which they say that adverse effects can occur, specifically diarrhea and gastrointestinal disturbances. Since the UL is based on total intake, it's possible but not certain that if you're taking 2000 mg/day by pill in addition to some amount from diet, you could be getting enough to cause one of the rarer symptoms of influenza in adults, diarrhea. The 2000 mg/day dose was not confirmed by a controlled experiment but was corroborated by even higher doses causing diarrhea; it was basically a precautionary maximum since the authors could not find evidence of a benefit at that dose. Regarding treatment for common cold, the authors concluded, "Thus, the data are not consistent or specific enough to estimate the vitamin C requirement based on the common cold." However, they did find that there was "no significant effect on incidence of the common cold, but do provide a moderate benefit in terms of the duration and severity of episodes in some groups." The document did not evaluate vitamin C's possible effects on influenza. The benefit was based on three studies: 1) Chalmers (1975)[5], 2) Jariwalla and Harakeh (1996)[6] and 3) Ludvigsson et al. (1977).[7] For Chalmers, the dose was 1000 mg or more per day but they concluded, "that the minor benefits of questionable validity are not worth the potential risk, no matter how small that might be." For Ludvigsson et al. the dose was 1000 mg/day in children. Bongolian (talk) 09:17, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

A toast to the host who can boast the most roast!

Wanna help source this? We can't have a total of 1 source in an article on a living person. And she certainly seems missional. All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 03:43, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Short as the references were, they were messed up to begin with. I cleaned them up: it's a start. Sounds like you're back in good form! Was it the Vitamin P(izza)? Bongolian (talk) 04:16, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, RZ is doing his best... And practice will eventually make perfect. Actually, I'm as ill as ever. It feels like some well-endowed man has been copulating with each of my ear canals. I don't mean to be gross, but I just woke up and I can't stop spitting vivid green gunk. It's like wiping a marker; it just never seems to run out. Like, even after growling and gurgling over the sink and blowing my nose into a whole packet of napkins, I still just need to hum gently and my spit will be almost unadulterated not-saliva. I realize now how much of my mucous production must've gotten a gravity ride downstream into my throat as I slept... Ok, I'm being gross. Sorry. Stupid myeloperoxidase. But nevermind — about the one thing I've had the energy to do when ill this time around is sit on RW for some reason. Could just be my ADHD in the end. Far from cured yet, regardless. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you're being gross, glad you admitted it. As someone who used to lurk on alt.taseltess, it's a bit hard to gross me out verbally. Maybe you should try an over-the-counter decongestant? Bongolian (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

So I take it that you even referring to my above words as "being gross" is kind of a compliment, eh? Hehe. But I wasn't trying to be nasty, really... And I mean, you're a person who reads a lot of studies on kidney failure and whatnot. I didn't imagine you as somebody who would be overly squeamish about the human body (and I guessed right). Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

And now, for something completely different

From one thing to the other; do you know this fine gentleman?

Why, no. Is it a Swedish country & Western star? Distant cousin of Heino? Bongolian (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Haha, I forgot to give you credit for this funny reply (since I had missed it entirely). Thanks, just you made me snort in RL! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

You might also enjoy Jello Biafra of The Dead Kennedys extolling the (ahem) virtues of Heino in this extract from the movie Crate Diggers (starting at around 6:30 in the video).[8]

Lookie

here. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

EiK

He's already been blocked for five years, so I don't see the point in binning him on top of that. --Taylor Swift lover (talk) 05:37, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

OK, I have removed the vandal bin setting. Bongolian (talk) 05:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Book nerd

I just traded Betty Fussell's Eat Live Love Die for Patti Smith's Just Kids. I have M F K Fisher up next, somehow, haven't figured that one out yet. How long is Bend in the River?

It's a 288 page novel. Bongolian (talk) 08:55, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

On it.

Edit: There was a groan involved. But I'm on it.

I mean, I'm more into Carver than Vonnegut for a reason. Can probably burn 288 though. Thanks for the heads up, brotha. Gaul Dernitt (talk) 09:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

It was also recommended by President Obama.[9] Bongolian (talk) 18:07, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Since you're a "study reading"-type of guy

Here's the bizarro world version of doing that. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 08:08, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Likely up your alley

Clear potential for bronze, if not silver. Just as a heads up. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:58, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, up my alley, but not my cup of tea. I made some improvements. Your turn? All the best, Bongo. Bongolian (talk) 06:08, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

RE: Diagnosing Trump

Don't miss this essential piece of the (potential/likely) narcissist puzzle. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Speaking of "common cold" supplements

After my (late) discovery that the prestigious studies which showed the efficiacy of oral zinc supplementation for the common cold had since been retracted, I was atleast happy to see that Vitamin D recently got some major press on that topic. Here's the recent meta-analysis in question. Also, here's an interesting review article from a while back (2014).

These developments are especially interesting, considering Vitamin D is one of those rare vitamins which you generally benefit from by dosing a bit above the RDI. Examine put it well in the review I linked above:

Overall, vitamin D is both cheap (roughly 5 cents for a daily dosage of 2000 IU) and safe (is not toxic except at absurdly high levels). While it may not fix everything, it has enough benefits to warrant taking. Vitamin D is cheap, safe, effective, and most people are in a deficient state. If you do not get enough direct sunlight exposure, supplementation is the prudent choice.

Currently, I take 50ug Vitamin D a day (though not for any cold prevention reasons). Note also that I get like five minutes of direct sunlight a day (lmao). All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it seems likely that above RDA vitamin D does have multiple beneficial effects. I take 2000 IU/day myself. There's no scientific consensus yet on raising the RDA though. Bongolian (talk) 18:36, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Mind taking a look

...at this?

I've no idea if the guy is a concern troll or if he has legitimately excellent points. His sources, whatever they contain, use nice URLs (NCBI, Nature.com) if nothing else. But really, I've barely glanced at any of this.

Since you're well versed at this type of thing (and since I'm just about to slide shut the lid of my coffin and get to sleep before the dawn's first rays of sunlight char my ancient face), I figured maybe you could give the BoN's concerns a (re)view. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

This statement should also be assessed. Thanks. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 02:00, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

I have commented there, but the topic is actually outside my areas of expertise. More eyes on this would be helpful. Bongolian (talk) 20:35, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Taking out the trash

No need to bother unwelcoming troll accounts. Also, for that much spamming (see RC), a 1 hour block is way too little. And don't forget to vandal bin vandals ASAP, even when they haven't earned a particularly long block (assuming their 1 offending edit was vandalism). Thanks for looking out, anyways. All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, Percy! I didn't initially realize they were also doing it from multiple accounts. Bongolian (talk) 01:01, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Not to sound presumptous, but

Remember to always take nobs' words with an extra pinch of salt. You know, just... considering. All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Percy. Once he got into Nixon worship and the various made up "Ages" in the Saloon, it became pretty clear. He did have an interesting perspective on his former residence though. Bongolian (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Nobs certainly is interesting. But as much as he likes to wall-of-text about geopolitics — almost coming across as sensible at times — keep in mind that (as recently as yesterday) he was openly calling for Hillary and Obama, among others, to be "marched out and summarily shot". xD Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:17, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

I think that's a bit unfair, I think he was just saying he thought they were corrupt. It was just because of how you asked the question. Even nobs wouldn't go that far, or would he? Christopher (talk) 11:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't think it's unfair in the least to ask the man a direct question:

"Do you think [the people you just listed] should be X?"

Getting a:

"Yes, I do think that X should be done to [the following 3 of the people 5 I just listed]".

And in return, citing that reply as:

"Nobs was openly calling for [those 3 people he specified] to be X".

Though I consider it vital that I actually linked to the original exchange in full.

Feel free to ask the man for a clarification on his views if you're uncertain — it's what I did to get the above cited reply in the first place

And I do think that nobs thinks that he thinks that, yes. But unless you've read this entire thing, you wouldn't be used to the way he, uh... "reasons". All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk)09:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Yo dawg

I herd you like limericks, so I put a limerick in your limerick so you can limerick while you limerick.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 07:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Krej! Bongolian (talk) 07:42, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

No prob.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 08:09, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

You utter idiot

You know how u said dont edit other people's articles? That article on the homeopathy talk page saying a brief message is MY article. It says unsigned by rbspidey right there u blind shithead. And guess what? You broke your own rules u danm hypocrite. Just because I didnt know how to sign an edit u do this to me? Is this how u treat people new to rationalwiki?? By Rbspidey 10:32 May 5th 2017 UTC

In the process, you blanked my comment and other people's comments. You should have either just edited your own comment or added a new comment. Bongolian (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

My sincerest apologies for the misunderstanding. By Rbspidey May 15th. ^{— Unsigned, by: Rbspidey / talk / contribs}

Apology accepted. Thank you. Bongolian (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

On MRE

Why did you block him for that long? —Evo and Meta (speak, speak) | Look at what I've done! 01:02, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

His post was rather offensive and directed at a specific person based on her gender. Furthermore, he had been acting like a troll and had not contributed anything constructed to RW. If you think it merits a shorter block, you are free to change it to something shorter, but please consider the totality of his edits. Bongolian (talk) 01:05, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Which post? Was it the one I hid with a hat? —Evo and Meta (speak, speak) | Look at what I've done! 00:30, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it was that one. In my view it made him deserving of a block, and as per blocking instructions harassment is deserving a of a long block. Also, there was some slightly veiled harassment by sock puppets following the block. Bongolian (talk) 00:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Christopher Shays

I dont want to sound a like a jerk, but Shays is actually from Connecticut and not New York.S.H. DeLong (talk) 06:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, I don't see how this makes you a jerk, but I don't know what this is in reference to either. Bongolian (talk) 06:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I was just correcting you to inaccuracy on your user page. S.H. DeLong (talk) 06:42, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I fixed it. Bongolian (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Edit reversion

Can you tell me why you deleted my topic on the Saloon Bar? Seems to be a mistake but I'm just making sure. Lord Aeonian (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

It was a mistake. Sorry about that. Bongolian (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

No worries :) Lord Aeonian (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Predictive_programming

About the Falun Gong definition

Hi Bongolian! Just wanted to know your opinion about the proposal I wrote on the talk page. Basically it would be what we discussed previously there, of changing the sentences and category that define it as a cult, and in the same edit also add a fragment that talks about the Chinese communist party considering it a cult, and talking some more about it's categorization. Perhaps it would be useful to include the different perspectives regarding the categorization of the practice, and include the opinions of experts as well so that we can have a clearer picture. Let me know your thoughts!--Deepthought (talk) 12:07, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

In all seriousness there needs to be an Article for Kraut and Tea he is many fallacies wrapped in one.

^{— Unsigned, by: Knightofjustice123 / talk / contribs}

Not my problem. If you want it that bad, write it yourself. Bongolian (talk) 02:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

EvoWiki redirects

Don't change the capitalisations - those are literally the capitalisations that got hits - David Gerard (talk) 10:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

OK Bongolian (talk) 16:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

For the love of God please use bot for EvoWiki redirects

pls Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 11:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

It seems excessively complicated to me for the task at hand. I have to install and learn Python to do this it seems. Also, the wiki documentation leaves something to be desired. I have done some substantial Perl programming, but unless there's some remunerative reason, I'm not too keen on learning a new programming language.

If it would drive you less nuts, I could cut down the EvoWiki redirects to something more modest like say 10 per day maximum. Bongolian (talk) 18:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Learning a new language should take a day or two if you already know one.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 00:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

No one's paying me to do that. I've got other things I'm doing. Bongolian (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

I was unclear -- you don't need PyWikiBot for this. Just go to your user rights and select "bot" to have your edits not show up on Recent Changes (by default). TLDR: Click "bot" so you don't spam RC. Unclick when done. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 01:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

OK, much better. Will do. Thanks! Bongolian (talk) 01:27, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

And could you check that you're not redirecting to a redirect? There are currently 9 double redirects. Christopher (talk) 07:01, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

OK Bongolian (talk) 07:06, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Do You Read "Order of the Stick"?

I have a metaphor based on it. RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:16, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

No Bongolian (talk) 03:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

OK. So the point is, one of the kingdoms the main characters come across is ruled over by a fat, idiotic red dragoness who's obsessed with eating and "looking awesome." However, it's revealed that the kingdom is actually run by a charismatic general who is also an adventurer (like the main characters), and his reptilian cleric friend. He (the general) says that it's easier to let the dragoness look like she's running the show, but the dragoness is only one ruler in a long line of petty despots, all of whom are/were under the general and cleric's thumbs.

See, I too thought the Republicans were spineless cowards letting Trump hold their balls in a vice. Then I realized the truth. Trump is a puppet. The Republicans never bent the knee to him for power because Trump had no real power to give. Trump's a fat idiot who'll sign anything Ryan and/or Pence put in front of him, and Trump has a hold on Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania (edit:,traditionally Democratic states that have now entered the GOP fold). His antics and our panic over his (highly unrealistic) agenda distract from the fact that banking regulations are being rolled back, environmental protections are being destroyed, and that our country is far more likely to become a Gilded Age corporatocracy than a neo-Third Reich. Trump himself is too distracted by the glamour of his office to either notice or care that he's a puppet. Totalitarianism is coming, but not from Trump. Rather, any totalitarian American state will be masterminded by the people accused of letting it happen. RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:38, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

A Question

On 23 June 2017 you added this quotation from Henry Gee:

"When confronted with stories in the Daily Nimbyist Bungaloid Curtain-Twitcher I murmur words such as 'this', 'touch', 'with', 'don't' and 'bargepole'. However, when alerted to the following gem by my correspondent B. C. of Swindon, I really had to investigate. The headline is enough to make one gasp and stretch one's eyes:'Humans evolved after a female chimpanzee mated with a pig': Extraordinary claim made by American geneticist"

to this page (which is about me). Could you tell me please, why you did? In doing so, you're just adding to Rationalwiki's misrepresentation of me and my ideas because, although the Daily Mail did have that headline referring to me, the Mail never contacted me, so their descriptions of my ideas are largely erroneous. In particular, I do not, and have never, CLAIMED that. The most that can be accurately said is that I have written up a discussion that considers the evidence relating to the hypothesis that humans arose from hybridization of that type. This is very different from my claiming that such a thing occurred. To actually make such claim would be ridiculous. But as I say, I merely consider a hypothesis. Is RationalWiki now playing the same game as the Daily Nimbyist Bungaloid Curtain-Twitcher? That is, are they now simply making things up rather than contacting the parties concerned for correction/confirmation? 162.197.60.142 (talk) 18:51, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

The only way that Bongolian's edit impliex that you claim apes and pigs mated leading to humans was adding a quote that quoted the Daily Mail as saying you do. That isn't the same as saying you claim it unless you treat the Daily Mail as a reliable source of information. Christopher (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I did not quote the Daily Mail directly, as we know it is generally not a reliable source. I quoted Henry Gee, a senior editor at Nature. If you have a gripe with this in RW, then you also have a gripe with Gee. Did you reply to or attempt to reply to Gee's article? If so please give us the citation. Bongolian (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

"...generally not a reliable source" being the understatement of the year. ^^ Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:31, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Bongolian, I would have no problem with your quoting Henry Gee quoting an accurate statement. But you are quoting Henry Gee quoting the Daily Mail. Therefore its hard for me to see how you could not yourself be quoting the Daily Mail. I'm not sure what your point is when you say "directly," given that always, if B quotes A and C quotes B, you can be sure that C is quoting A. So again, if you know that the Daily Mail is unreliable and you now know, moreover, that they are misrepresenting me, why quote their misrepresentation? They published that article about me without bothering to consult me to see whether they were representing my opinions correctly. Why spread their lies and defame me further? What is your intent? It seems that to do so only extends their misrepresentation to a new setting (i.e., to RationalWiki). As for your question (Did you reply to or attempt to reply to Gee's article?), I considered it, but Gee raised almost no substantive objections that didn't already appear in Myers' article, and I had already rebutted Myers at length here. In general, I think you could say Gee defers to Myers (even though Myers seems to know almost nothing about hybridization that couldn't be read in any high school biology text). As for the unique element in Gee's blog, his non-substantive objections (e.g., "If you were a pig, would you actually want to be related to us?"), I suppose they're marginally funny, but I saw no reason to address them. But if you can find any serious objection raised by Gee not addressed in my rebuttal of Myers, I'll be happy to reply to it, if you'll just let me know. Perhaps I'll even write an article specifically addressing Gee. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 13:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

Response to Christopher:

Christopher, when Bongolian quotes Henry Gee as follows,

"'Humans evolved after a female chimpanzee mated with a pig': Extraordinary claim made by American geneticist",

it seems to me that his/her edit doesn't merely imply that I claim it, but rather essentially states that I claim it, unless you're going to argue that the second part of the quotation (Extraordinary claim made by American geneticist) somehow doesn't refer to the first part of the quotation (Humans evolved after a female chimpanzee mated with a pig), which I don't think you can reasonably do. If Bongolian wants to paint me as some sort of fanatic who makes such a claim, then I'd suggest that he/she do it in an honest way by finding a place where I actually say it, and not sneak around by the backdoor, by quoting misrepresentations. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 13:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

P.S., If I don't get a response by, say, Monday, I'd like to go ahead and remove this inaccurate quoted headline (unless there's some objection and you want to discuss it further). 162.197.60.142 (talk) 13:22, 13 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

1) Saying "the Daily Mail said this" ≠ saying "this is true". 2) You appear to claim it on this page where there is a blue box entitled "the theory in a nutshell", I'll copy it here:

The theory in a nutshell:

Specifically, I suggest that the facts we have from observation best fit the supposition that a chimpanzee- or bonobo-like animal anciently crossed with a pig to produce an offspring that then mated back ("backcrossed") to a chimpanzee. The theory then posits that further backcrossing to chimpanzee occurred in subsequent generations, so that the amount of pig in the descendant hybrids was greatly diluted so that they became much more like chimpanzees than pigs. However, as might be expected, certain traces of pig would remain. Humans, it proposes, emerged from the resulting highly variable hybrid population.

You use "theory" (as a scientist discussing biology, it's fairly obvious which definition of theory you mean) and say "the facts we have from observation best fit the supposition that [pigs + apes mating etc]." Although you do also use "supposition" to describe the pig/ape stuff in the quoted text. Christopher (talk) 18:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

New comments about your recent addition to the Eugene M. McCarthy page

Just added another section to the bottom of the talk page. It explains what's wrong with some of the material you just added to the Eugene M. McCarthy page (at least, from the fossil record, I believe it was you). I'm going to go ahead and write up another section explaining some problems with the rest of what you wrote, so please look for that later. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 17:51, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I just added two more such sections to the bottom of the talk page (both marked with triple arrowheads). 162.197.60.142 (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I just added an additional rebuttal of your argument (see the bottom of the talk page). It, too, is marked with triple arrowheads. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 22:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I just responded to your comments at the bottom of the talk page. Have a good weekend. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 14:52, 15 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

I just added some more responses for you. To make them easy to find I've marked them with a double-hyphen ("--"). 162.197.60.142 (talk) 20:40, 17 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

By the way, I've figured out now how to ping you when I respond, so I'll be doing that instead from now on. 162.197.60.142 (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)Gene McCarthy

There is no need to ping me at all I get notified when your page changes. Bongolian (talk) 22:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Come join me at my pad in Orthanc, Gandalf! xoxo // Sauruman

You've been nominated to the RationalMedia Foundation election. Please accept or decline here; if you accept, you may wish to campaign.

 All the best, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:01, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

While both Human and Ikanreed are great assets to the foundation and all-round tremendous guys for the job (which is why I frankly hope for them to be able retain their current seats in this election), I was both glad and elated to notice your expressed interest in running for board member sometime in the future — considering the fact that far from everyone of our numerous "equally board-worthy" contributors also show a personal interest in ever considering a board position.

As such: I'd just like you to know that — when and if that moment arrives — I'd consider you highly qualified for the job, and certainly among my personal 'top picks' for trustee.

So please — don't stop entertaining an interest in future service as trustee. One day, the board just might need you on it. All the best buddy, Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Percy. Hopefully next time around. Bongolian (talk) 02:55, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Southern strategy

Why did you revert my edits on Southern strategy? JohnLogan (talk) 16:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

While there is an argument to be made that the Southern strategy was not deliberate (see top-down vs. bottom-up in Southern strategy, you (@JohnLogan) need to include some citations and/or make a better argument for it to make those changes. Bongolian (talk) 20:51, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump userbox

I see there is no userbox for those who supported Donald Trump as President. If you would be so kind as to make one --PresidentofthegreatestnationonearthDonaldJTrump (talk) 23:06, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

How do you like this for a start? Bongolian (talk) 23:11, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Perfection --PresidentofthegreatestnationonearthDonaldJTrump (talk) 23:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Strange Mysteries

I protected the page at its original version. If you want, you can talk to the 73 BoNs on the talkpage. RoninMacbeth (talk) 20:09, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Bongolian (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Awesome Award

🧠Rationalwiki

Awesome Award

for Bongolian/Archive1

Reason: being awesome

For quality edits over the years.

ClickerClock (talk) 06:45, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Problem With Israel Article- The Sequel of complaint and the shadow of bias

Evil Zionist is pushing a agenda of pro-imperialism onto several people within this website. He never listens to anyone, and has a nagging problem with a lack of sources. Zionist even admits on his user page that they are a "Hardcore Zionist" so how can they get away with this? If this was a "Hardcore Christian" or "Hardcore Communist", I'd imagine his ability to edit would be more closely scrutinized. Being a Zionist is completely fine- but the user never listens to options, and never adapts his ideology. Reading the comments of his User page and of yourself, I have found that they talk about "Caring for the facts" yet usage of any of the major texts on Israel, such as Chomsky's "Who Rules The World" are not used, probably due to the conclusions of the text, which are negative. Therefore, a clear bias can be seen from this user, and I personally advocate such a user to not be involved in the editing process of such articles. Israel will always be a sore subject, but the current page on it is lacking in neutrality. User also states talking about this issue "like rational people", which suggests that he is rational in the first place, which in of itself is a topic not worth engaging in. Father White Jackson AKA 194.82.180.254 (talk) 12:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

As I have told Evil Zionist, lack of sources on Israel/Palestine pages particularly is a bad thing. I warned Evil Zionist shortly after his/her joining that we're not too tolerant of ideological wars on these pages due to past experience with time wastage in Chicken Coop issues and it causing high-quality editors to flee RW. In my view, unsourced modifications to these pages are worthy of reversion. If You and Evil Zionist can't resolve changes on the talk pages, then just forget it. @Evil Zionist Bongolian (talk) 17:12, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Your revert to Donald Trump.

Hello, Bongolian.

I wonder why you revert this edit saying that Trump is a Luddite.

Here is an article on POLITICO that you'll see first: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-technology-luddite-233067

Cheers. -- Bryan See (talk) 19:16, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Bryan See. I reverted it because there is no evidence on the page for the claim that Trump is a Luddite. Being obsessed with a smart phone and Fox News would seem to be evidence to the contrary. @Bryan See Bongolian (talk) 19:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

He blames computers for making the world worse, complicating it very greatly. He called computers a mixed bag. I am very sure. And he's stirring up backlash against tech. -- Bryan See (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

If that's true, you need to first put something on the Trump webpage to that effect with a good reference. @Bryan See Bongolian (talk) 19:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

But where? This page or Policies of Donald Trump? Or both? I think any of them will do. Thanks. @Bongolian -- Bryan See (talk) 10:00, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it belongs at all, given that they're strong evidence to the contrary — smart phone & TV addiction. Bongolian (talk) 16:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bryan See, I've warned you before. Don't put unreferenced additions into the Trump page. Also, it's inadvisable to get involved with edit wars with @CowHouse. Talk it over on the Trump talk page before things get out of hand. In my view the Luddite and Baba Vanga additions do not belong on the main Trump page, but you're welcome to argue your case on the Trump talk page. Bongolian (talk) 18:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, @Bongolian. I know what must be done. -- Bryan See (talk) 06:23, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bongolian, I know. But I'd like to argue my case here. Trump does have a lot of contempt on digital technology, especially computers. He wants people to wean every tech off. Furthermore, he call it quits for science and tech since Day One. -- Bryan See (talk) 08:35, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

You should argue your case on the talk page for Trump, not here, @Bryan See. Bongolian (talk) 18:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Dumpster dive thank you

Thank you for diving into the levitation article.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 03:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome, @CheeseburgerFace. I just had to rise to the occasion. Bongolian (talk) 03:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Response to your inquiry.

Nothing more than a shared pet peeve as far as I know. GrammarCommie (talk) 04:31, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Question about copyright infringement

Is this picture, uploaded by User:Onacompass, copyright infringement? I'm asking you specifically since you have already warned Onacompass against uploading copyrighted material. Thanks. CowHouse (talk) 05:25, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

It's hard to tell if it's a copyright violation because it lacks attribution (also bad). It could be the book cover of Fred Schwarz' 1953 book, Communism — A Disease, but that's just my guess. Better to delete unless it can be attributed, I think. However, low-resolution book covers would probably be considered fair use (not a copyright violation). @CowHouse Bongolian (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll just ping @Onacompass so they know why it got deleted. CowHouse (talk) 05:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Block

Apparently I was blocked by you for feeding the troll? CowHouse (talk) 12:33, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake, @CowHouse. I had meant to block the BoN that you had reverted. Bongolian (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder.

I wasn't aware that it was British English. I thought it was an honest typo. Thank you nonetheless. (Not sure if im responding the right way, cant tell if there are PMs or not. New here. ) ^{— Unsigned, by: Roxxias / talk / contribs} 02:23, 11 December 2017‎ (UTC)

@Roxxias If you write a message on a user's talk page, they will be notified about it. If you want to alert them on another page you can ping them like this: {{ping|USERNAME}}

Also, please sign your comments on talk pages with four tiles at the end of your comment (Like this: ~~~~). If you are replying to another comment, you can use colons (:) to indent your replies so they are easy to read. CowHouse (talk) 02:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

You've been nominated as moderator

You've been nominated in the upcoming moderator elections. See the nomination at RationalWiki:Moderator elections/Nominations.

FuzzyCatPotato of the Purple Conservatives (talk/stalk) 19:55, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, @FuzzyCatPotato. I appreciate your support. Bongolian (talk) 04:45, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Voting Booth Notice

I was thinking something to this effect:

"Please note that RationalWiki does not have a secret ballot system. If election fraud is suspected by election officials, ballots are open to forensic examination."

Sound good? RoninMacbeth (talk) 01:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

It looks reasonable to me. How about you, @FuzzyCatPotato? Bongolian (talk) 01:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I'd say it's pretty reasonable. 𝔊𝔬𝔞𝔱-𝔈𝔪𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔬𝔯 𝔅𝔦𝔤𝔰 (𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔴𝔦𝔰𝔡𝔬𝔪/𝔞𝔠𝔥𝔦𝔢𝔳𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔰) 17:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Complimentary hug

Thanks for endorsing me! -D1@m0ndD15c1 (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome, @DiamondDisc1! Bongolian (talk) 22:35, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

photos

so is it possible to upload people's photos from their social media like twitter or facebook? Dr. Witt (talk) 18:15, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

this photo is a still from a bbc video File:Mikemikev BBC.png do you know what the fair use for this would be?Dr. Witt (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

In general, the photos could be but you need to 1) use the fair use template when you upload the image 2) specify where them image came from 3) include your user name in the upload template 4) Give a rationale for why it's fair use (low resolution, no other alternative, etc.). Bongolian (talk) 18:24, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Election Hacking

Look, if J. Zoia does attempt to hack the election (which I'm less sure of every day), we can still counter it. I don't think we should worry too much because, if someone really obvious does win, we can just open the ballots up. I did place that notice on the voting booth, so that's in place as well. RoninMacbeth (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I realize that. Thank you for doing that, @RoninMacbeth. It's just that what has happened so far is suspiciously similar so far to what happened last year. Bongolian (talk) 19:24, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Well hey, at least Avenger isn't here this time. RoninMacbeth (talk) 19:26, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Grammar

Hi, I would like to help expanding most of the Latin American articles starting with Costa Rica, but I'm unsure if my grammar is good enough. I wonder if there is some way to check the grammar before or ask the articles to be reviewed once the expanding is done. --TV Guy (talk) 00:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@TV Guy you could copy the article content into a page in your userspace, e.g. User:TV Guy/Costa Rica or just User:TV Guy/sandbox, make your changes and then they can be copied back if everything looks good. —Kazitor, ^pending 00:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Start with one, then let me know when you're done and I'll read it over, @TV Guy @Kazitor. Bongolian (talk) 00:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Perfect, I'll do it that way. Hope is not too much work because probably will have a considerable lenght. --TV Guy (talk) 01:30, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, for know if you can check the grammar (and format if necessary) on User:TV Guy/Pink Tide and User:TV Guy/New Acropolis I'll be very thankful. --TV Guy (talk) 08:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I have now edited and moved both of these pages (Pink Tide and New Acropolis) to mainspace. Great work on your part, @TV Guy! Bongolian (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I really liked RW a lot, I hope I can contribute more. --TV Guy (talk) 05:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

RW Mentions

Does that really count as a "popular source"? Listing some Quora answer seems to me like listing a random Reddit comment.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 07:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm not really committed to keeping it, but what then defines "popular source", @Krej? Bongolian (talk) 08:06, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea what the intention was of the person who created that section, but I interpret it as reasonably popular blogs or websites, as opposed to just comments (which is, I guess, what that particular answer on Quora is).--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 08:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I've undone my edit. Not a big deal, @Krej. Bongolian (talk) 08:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Moderator election results

See the results here. Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 03:38, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations! Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 03:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, @FuzzyCatPotato! Bongolian (talk) 03:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congrats, Bongolian!—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 04:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations to the new cabal (there is no cabal). Cheers, Cosmikdebris (talk) 04:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on your reelection, a very good choice for mod. Christopher (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you all, and congratulations to my fellow moderators, all of whom I consider to be excellent choices: @CheeseburgerFace, @Christopher, @CowHouse, @DiamondDisc1, @LeftyGreenMario! Bongolian (talk) 18:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I voted for you! Don't screw anything up, Bongos! --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:18, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I voted for you too, @LeftyGreenMario. Now that we're both moderators we can keep each other in check! Bongolian (talk) 19:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Aw, I'll try to remember blocking you in the future, for your kind gesture to me. :) --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

what page is proper for this?

look im not trolling if i was trolling i would edit the main page rather than the talk page of the articles

what page is proper for this? https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_appropriation#Transethnicity https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Blackface#Rachel_Dolezal_controversy clogosphere? you work it out im a noob

i now quote her personal website https://www.martina-big.com/ Hi there, my name is Martina Big. I was born in a Western German town, as a white girl. I have a boyfriend :-) We've been together since I was 17 years old. My native language is German. But I also speak English. In the past I worked, along with my boyfriend, for a regional airline, him as a pilot and me as a flight attendant.

Middle of January 2017 I had a medical procedure witch changed my appearance fundamental. First my skin goes darker. Then my hair, my eyes and my eyebrows darkened. Then I noticed that my completely body changed from a Caucasian to a Black woman. Therefore I went in July 2017 to the government and changed my ethnicity official to "Black". Consequently got a new passport and ID card. I like my new African look very much :) Therefore, I will support my body in the further transformation. I will also change my facial features to African and enlarge my buttocks.^{— Unsigned, by: 110.141.21.43 / talk}

Clogosphere or Talk:Blackface. @110.141.21.43 Bongolian (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Elliott "Eli Mosley" Kline's criminal record

https://www.mylife.com/elliott-kline/e452028669510

This website says that Kline DOES have arrest and criminal record. Apparently, it also says that Kline is (ironically) Jewish. Kline also has tattoos. https://dstormer6em3i4km.onion.link/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/salt-310x165.jpg PlatinumExpress (talk) 00:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

There are a bunch of Elliot/Elliott Klines in the world. How do you know that it's ths same one? Also, arrest does not mean conviction. It's not that interesting really, @PlatinumExpress. Bongolian (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I have a criminal record, does that automatically make me a bad person? Comrade GC (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

No it doesn't automatically. Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks had criminal records for a good reason. Bongolian (talk) 01:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Since you're an experienced moderator and editor, I was wondering how allegations of plagiarism should be handled. At the moment, I've only mentioned it here. GrammarCommie suggested a coop case but I'm unsure if that's appropriate. CowHouse (talk) 08:23, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

It's a serious issue. Generally, I would revert the edit and warn the user. If the user ignores the warning and continues to plagiarize, it could be grounds for a coop case if they're a sysop. If they're not a sysop, they could just be blocked as appropriate. Bongolian (talk) 08:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. CowHouse (talk) 08:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Brianna Wu

Could you restore the article and move it to my userspace as a work in progress? Sailor Haumea (talk) 03:09, 21 February 2018 (UTC) OK, will do, @Sailor Haumea. Bongolian (talk) 03:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

See User:Sailor Haumea/Brianna Wu, @Sailor Haumea. Bongolian (talk) 03:15, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Lyndon LaRouche

Why did you revert my edit? It's literally just listing his full date of birth (like all encyclopedias do). Sailor Haumea (talk) 04:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Most of our entries for people just have a birth year, @Sailor Haumea. We're mainly concerned with 1) distinguishing a person from similarly named people (e.g., by birth year) and 2) whether they're alive. These reasons are both because of potential libel issues. Also, we're not an encyclopedia: see RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article?#RationalWiki is not an encyclopedia. Bongolian (talk) 05:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Basic income (James Earl Cash's revenge)

Hi, recently I added few criticisms in the section "Advantages" of Basic income. Soon after, James Earl Cash reverted my edits. It seems to me that my edits are founded and I think that James Earl Cash reverted them just to spite me, since recently we had a discussion.

Please take a look. I added my criticisms in the talk page of Basic income. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Basic_income#Adding_some_criticisms_to_advantages --McLaghing (talk) 08:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Apologies

This edit was done by absolute blunder; I have no memory of me doing this, must be mistouching of my iPhone, and actually I'm worried if its not hacking but I hope its not. Anyways, I just wanted to tell you that. Cheers. Dogeatsdog (talk) 00:25, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks, @Dogeatsdog! Bongolian (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

James Earl Cash and Basic income

Hi,

please take a look at the edits of James Earl Cash to the page Basic income. After I added some criticisms to the section Advantages (also with the consensus of Christopher), and after a very long conversation (see the Talk Page), he deleted my edits and even half of the section Disadvantages. He pretends that I'm ignoring his points, but you can see on the Talk Page that I answered to them one by one, while he is showing to effort to have a honest conversation. --McLaghing (talk) 10:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

It looks like Christopher has dealt with this by locking the page, @McLaghing. Bongolian (talk) 20:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Your thoughts

See my comments about rewriting some sections on an article.Debunking spiritualism (talk) 23:12, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Signing stickies

Should I have done so? It is my understanding that stickies are a form of site announcement, and as such reflect the majority of the site rather than one user. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:16, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie I'm not aware of the what the protocol is one way or the other. You can remove it if you think it's best. Bongolian (talk) 02:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

request

see here.Agent47 (talk) 11:20, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

@Agent47: Your edit was deleted because it was in the wrong location.[10] I think that what you actually want is a change of protection for the page or a promotion to sysop. The request for the former should be made on the talk page for Rome Viharo, and the request for the latter should be made at RationalWiki:Your mother's basement. Bongolian (talk) 18:18, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

the talk page is also protected, so didn't know where else to write it. Can you unlock the Rome Viharo article and its talk? if worried about vandalism, you can protect to autopatrolled, not only sysop.Agent47 (talk) 19:00, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

@Agent47: I have changed the protection to autopatrolled. You should be able to edit now. Bongolian (talk) 19:51, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

thanks.Agent47 (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Toynbee tiles

They are 'peculiar enough' and have enough coverage (mostly of a fairly reasonable rather than not) to have #some# coverage on RW.

However I am presently otherwise engaged. Some of us have are best at starting the snowball rolling for others to add 'snark and goat'/asking (im)pertinent questions for others to demonstrate their knowledge in answering.

Perhaps there could be an article that covers the TT and other 'unofficial art and commentary in the urban environment' (but would have to be a collaborative piece). Anna Livia (talk) 09:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Anna Livia, I'm not questioning whether it's missional (it is), or whether it can be expanding (it clearly can be), but creating stubs is generally not helpful. It's betting to put it on the To Do list to gauge how much interest there might be in expanding it. Bongolian (talk) 16:13, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I did put it on the 'suggestions list' - but people are more likely to look at the 'Recent changes' list/find it by playing Random page bingo. Not everybody can do 'snark and goat' (and Wikipedia-splat-pastes are to be avoided). Anna Livia (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Anna Livia, if you don't have the time to work on it, it would be better to start it in your sandbox or user space. I'll move it to your user space for you. Bongolian (talk) 19:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Anna Livia, It's now located at User:Anna_Livia/Toynbee_tiles. Bongolian (talk) 19:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

The To-do list is usually the best idea if you want the article to exist but don't know what to say. I just did so with Morrissey, who deserves an article but I don't have the time to do a missional non-stub. There's also the point that writing two sentences and hoping expecting that other people will finish it for you is unreasonable, rude even. Wilder^Bicycle 19:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I have posted it to the to do list - but the topic is not presently in the news and 'recent changes' can get more attention.

Bear in mind that not everybody is RW-centric, and most RW-ians have started elsewhere in the wikiverse, and have been involved in creating stubs or collaborating in turning such into fully fledged articles - including on RW.

1. Most# articles on #most# wikis start off as stubs - so it is neither unreasonable nor rude to create such - and while it is fairly easy to identify a topic that is within the remit of a wiki not everybody has the time or background knowledge to go further on that particular topic. RW should be collaborative not telling people to just play around in their sandbox. Anna Livia (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Most stubs on RW don't go anywhere, particularly if the initial author doesn't put some effort into it. Stubs usually don't make any contribution at all because there is often a longer, better article already on WP, which is also true in this instance. Bongolian (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Toynbee tiles part 2

As I am not going to develop the pages myself please just delete them. - Anna Livia (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I've deleted the page at your request. Bongolian (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Some of us are more 'kiteflyers of interesting topics (even if these become subsections of other articles)'/'askers of relevant questions, suppliers of obscure facts and undoers of Titivlllus' snarly-ups' and inforof rather than 'developers of full articles' - because we are otherwise engaged/prefer to do so/it is in our nature to do so, and we have all seen RW and WP articles with tags several years old and topics languishing on the to do list. Anna Livia (talk) 10:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I made a discussion on the saloon bar about rome viharo

I think it is time we deleted the Rome Viharo article and admitted he was harassed: http://archive.is/gnfZc you can respond on the saloon bar Debunking spiritualism (talk) 02:52, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

There's an unsigned template

There's an unsigned template, in case you didn't know. {{unsigned|IP ADDRESS}}.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 18:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. Bongolian (talk) 18:33, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

hi

Can you autopatroll me? i want to create an article, but it won't submit because it says spam (but it isn't).Callimachus (talk) 18:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

What is the title or subject of the article, @Callimachus? Bongolian (talk) 19:20, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

GLF

Why are you and your comrades trying to utterly destroy Gregory Lauder-Frost, particularly his family, by your unnecessary smear. He is not a "white nationalist" anyway, so that's rubbish for a start. I really do think you should think of people's wive and children and their employment etc when you make these obvious smears. What anyone in the UK has doe to you folk is beyond me. 86.150.97.41 (talk) 17:06, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I have not edited the page (in any susbstantive way), and I am not really familiar with it. The place to discuss this is on it's talk page, particularly if you have any evidence that contradicts what is there now. Bongolian (talk) 17:19, 15 May 2018 (UTC) Bongolian (talk) 19:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Stargazer

im not weighing in on the validity of the edits but it seems like common decency to respond with an explanation of why you are reverting stargazer's edit. And now you block him with 'take it to the talk page'. they did. neither commiegramamr or you did. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that is fair enough. I also had not realized that @Star Gazer had gone to the talk page. I will respond there, @AMassiveGay. Bongolian (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

unblocking him might be helpful. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I just did, @AMassiveGay @Star Gazer. Bongolian (talk) 19:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Bongolian I just need to ask you about your definition of edit warring, as an aside to the Bait and Switch, Atheism stuff: If someone makes an edit or a revert, having extensively sought consensus and defended their actions thoroughly in the Talk page, and someone else repeatedly changes it without any such explanation, you think it's the person who is using the Talk page who should be banned for edit warring? I know I'm relatively new to this, but seems to me that if you can't ban both parties, then perhaps you should ban the one who isn't following community guidelines of engaging in constructive dialogue. Interested to hear your views on this. Star Gazer (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I concur with @Spud's reply on Talk:Bait-and-switch. Bongolian (talk) 16:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Uh. Sidestepped the question altogether. Christ on a bike, this site doesn't live up to its tagline. Star Gazer (talk) 20:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Assistance with an AfD

I'm attempting to start an AfD for Glynn Harrison however the article automatically links to an older AfD page when I do. Would you be willing to assist me in starting a new one? I'm not very experienced with these, sorry. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 17:18, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm actually not sure how to do that, @GrammarCommie. Maybe you can ask for help on RationalWiki:Technical support. Bongolian (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Categories

Okay, I think I get what you're saying with the categories. Like for John Locke, it does say on his official Wikipedia page that he was highly critical of atheism. If I added Locke's opinions of atheism to his page here on RationalWikia, then could I add Atheophobia back in the categories.

I did something similar to an edit I made to Allen West recently, where his page didn't say anything about him being homophobic, but I added in that he was (I looked up his official profile on GLAAD's website for his opinions on LGBTs) and only added the "Homophobes" and "Transphobia" categories after I made those edits. Is that what I should do from here on out? Just to be clear. BJA2112 (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, @BJA2112, that's basically correct. If the page does not already justify a category explicitly, you should:

1. Find a reliable source that justifies it.
2. Add a statement in your own words that explains it.
3. Add a citation to the reference.
4. Add the category.

Bongolian (talk) 00:42, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hi, is it possible for you to update my user rights? I think you have the power to make me a Ninja? I would appreciate it. Thanks --Kingdamian1 (talk) 20:10, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Bongolian sure does, but I don't know why you'd need the Ninja rights. I don't see your recent activity requiring them? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kingdamian1, @LeftyGreenMario Generally, you should make such requests here: RationalWiki:Requests for user rights, but you should plead your case for additional rights, that is explain why you want them. Bongolian (talk) 22:57, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

New template for you

{{tech pledge}}. —Kazitor, ^pending 01:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

AfD notice

A category you contributed significantly to has been nominated for deletion. —Kazitor 01:48, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Kazitor. @Nerd, @DuceMoosolini, @CheeseburgerFace, @LeftyGreenMario, @Serocco: you might also want to comment on this. Bongolian (talk) 02:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

KD1's Tempblock

Would it be wise to put him in sysoprevoke for the duration of his tempblock? Just so that he doesn't abuse his tools? RoninMacbeth (talk) 23:53, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

If he tries to unblock himself, he'll get sysoprevoke. If he continues his behavior shortly after the block, it's also a sysoprevoke. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@RoninMacbeth, @LeftyGreenMario Both of these characters have already tried to block evade using BoNs. I say go for the sysoprevoke for the duration of the ban. What do you say? Bongolian (talk) 00:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Sure. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Wait, which BoNs did they use? RoninMacbeth (talk) 00:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Was going to ask that. if only checkuser was available --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 01:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@RoninMacbeth, @LeftyGreenMario I looked at the Special:BlockList page. Bongolian (talk) 01:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

To be fair to WWW, his autoblock was at the same time I blocked him. I'm more willing to believe it was a quirk of the automation than WWW was logged in AND had a BoN on simultaneously. RoninMacbeth (talk) 01:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

OK Bongolian (talk) 01:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you gave 2 seconds to looking at the context of the dispute

Before pretending it's not a problem. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 00:52, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ikanreed There was no context in your latest post in the coop. I'd appreciate it if you at least gave me a link to what you're talking about. Bongolian (talk) 00:58, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ikanreed: Please explain it so someone can do it.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 01:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, the fuller explanation was reverted in 10 seconds the first time, when I actually made a case. Had 2 users go "oh but no other users looked at it so it's not a concern yet" then both ignored it. Nerd's edit warring for pretty bad bullshit being included in an article. For reasons that appear to be about not admitting a mistake more than thinking the edit was actually good. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 01:05, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Bingo

Ho-ho-ho-ho... ! I mean, uh, we probably need a Bingo card for gun control. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 02:12, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Sure, why not. Bongolian (talk) 02:15, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Elections

You've been nominated to the RationalMedia Foundation election. Please accept or decline here; if you accept, you may wish to campaign.

18:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

S. T. Joshi

I'm curious why you deleted the article. I have restored it. ^{— Unsigned, by: Lonius / talk / contribs}

@Lonius It's because of the copy/paste from Wikipedia. He said this in your talk page. Don't do that. TheEOE (talk) 15:48, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

WWW

Hi. I can't help but feel your block of WWW is somewhat... disproportionate. 3 months for a single (admittedly silly) edit? I think its too much. --RWRW (talk) 20:46, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I think if What a Wonderful World's being disruptive, you probably should fire a discussion first before taking action on a sysop-revoked user. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:53, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

WWW has been continuously disruptive and already desysopped. WWW's sole purpose on RW is disruption: it's rather obvious. The block was not for that comment it was for disrupting the election, which they've done in a number of ways. That's why I think WWW should blocked at least for the duration of the election. You're welcome reduce the block time, @LeftyGreenMario, but I will contest any reduction by @RWRW because he has also disrupted the election. Bongolian (talk) 22:53, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, what have I done to disrupt the election? --RWRW (talk) 02:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Just because you were induced to removed this from your user page, "I wanna make RationalWiki great again. I will drag it kicking and screaming from the clutches of the liberal left. I will rid this Wiki of the CNN style FAKE NEWS and provide honest, decent information provided by upright conservatives." doesn't mean that is no longer your intent, @RWRW. You're not kidding anyone. Bongolian (talk) 02:13, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Firstly I have made it clear that is no longer my intention (it was removed from my page sometime ago) and secondly, how the hell does that mean I "disrupted the election"? --RWRW (talk) 02:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I have nothing more to say about this at this point, @RWRW. Bongolian (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

He hasn't done anything to disrupt the election that I've seen, and I was the one who nominated him in the first place. [Clarification: I mean RWRW] Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 02:25, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

In other words you realise you've been caught out. I've been accused of many things on this site, but being accused of "disrupting the election" because of something (unrelated) I wrote on my userpage ages ago is certainly a new one. But I agree, this conversation is going nowhere. If you're going to accuse me of nonsense for no reason then I have nothing more to say either. Good day. --RWRW (talk) 02:26, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ OK, it's admittedly circumstantial, but here's my beef with you, @RWRW:

1. You only retracted the above statement because you wanted to become sysop. This seems rather clear. It's hardly long ago since you had some variant of that statement up through June 2018[11], and it's hardly irrelevant since it insinuated that you would stop at nothing for a takeover.
2. You have not disputed my claim from a while ago that you don't understand the difference between conservativism and autocracy. Look no further than your idolization of the autocrat-in-chief.
3. You stated that you were confident that you could win if you ran. Really, based on what: your lackluster edits or your hostility to the purpose or Rationalwiki?
4. We've had election hacking before, and could that perhaps be the reason that you're so confident?

FYI: @DuceMoosolini, @LeftyGreenMario. Bongolian (talk) 03:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

RWRW, my suggestion to earn Bongolian's trust is to make good edits and good comments (the latter... you haven't; it's not a matter of political disagreement by the way) and try dispelling your previous impression of wanting to disrupt RationalWiki. You haven't been making the effort to improve your image. That being said, I don't think a ban is completely appropriate but I don't lean heavily agree or disagree either way as I have little reason or enthusiasm to unban you. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:11, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

(ec):WWW admitted outright that they fucked with the last moderator election. We don't need to tolerate that kind of behavior around here. Cosmikdebris (talk) 03:13, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Geez, I missed that. WWW should be permabanned for that. Just to clarify, I in no way punished @RWRW since I had no direct evidence against him. The ban that I issued was against WWW, @LeftyGreenMario, @Cosmikdebris. Bongolian (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

What a Wonderful World should just be barred from participating in elections. Maybe he can vote. But he also admitted to nominating distrusted people to board "just to make things fun" when I think board business and decisions is not the place to monkey around... --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:18, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Really, how bad do someone's actions have to be before they get permabanned? In my view admission to election interference should be obvious grounds. @LeftyGreenMario, @Cosmikdebris Bongolian (talk) 03:21, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

In what way did WWW screw with the last election? Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 03:40, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, what's your evidence, @Cosmikdebris? Bongolian (talk) 03:41, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

In the discussion on the 2018 trustees election campaigning page, WWW stated: "Perhaps you should give it a little more weight considering I, together with a friend from high school, got Pbfreespace3 elected as an alternate for moderator..." This statement implies the use of sockpuppetry in the moderator election. Cosmikdebris (talk) 14:01, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Or maybe, MAYBE, WWW is an attention-seeking troll who's willing to prod a community that is historically concerned with election security. And if he did actually hack the election, maybe we should find out how he did it, rather than block just him? RoninMacbeth (talk) 19:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @RoninMacbeth, @Cosmikdebris It really doesn't matter what WWW has to say about this because he could either lie or say nothing, and because it's quite easy to fuck with the elections without doing any hacking at all (mainly via sockpuppetry). Bongolian (talk) 21:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Coop notice

A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment. --RWRW (talk) 18:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Pbfreespace

I wasn't there for most of the I/P thing. What part, exactly, did Pbfreespace play in it? RoninMacbeth (talk) 14:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Pbfreespace and Mona were involved in endless edit warring and blocking over ideological differences on the I/P pages from what I can remember. I wasn't particularly involved in the coop cases. You can read all the gory details from the coop cases if you want, @RoninMacbeth.[12] I think that the upshot was that the pages were protected for a period of time to allow a cooling off period, which may not have been too effective. @FuzzyCatPotato desysopped Mona in 2016, I think for reasons unrelated to the I/P dispute. Bongolian (talk) 23:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Ben Shapiro

Sorry, why did you remove my edit? Is it inaccurate in some way? As I mentioned, Ben has kids and is no longer a virgin, so the nickname is no longer apt. And the other line I removed was purely subjective personal opinion, unsourced. ^{— Unsigned, by: 73.252.203.121 / talk}

@73.252.203.121 The reference was written by Shapiro himself in which he stated, "I've become a favorite target of Internet leftists, who often refer to me as 'The Virgin Ben.'"[13] If it was just some schmuck who said it and Shapiro ignored it, then I'd be fine with deleting it. Bongolian (talk) 06:57, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

It was written by Shapiro himself...when he was 21 years old, 13 years ago. It's obviously no longer accurate. Are you forever a virgin because you said you were a virgin when you were a virgin? No? Then let the accurate edit stand, please. Your vitriol for the man is not as important as factual accuracy. ^{— Unsigned, by: 73.252.203.121 / talk}

Heston

We're not talking about voting? You said he supported a number of conservative politicians (those we vote for) and implying it's bad "The case the other way" - Notaliberalnosrs (talk) 05:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

• How about we talk about our differences of opinion here rather than involving the wiki in some slapfight :) - Notaliberalnosrs (talk) 05:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

@Notaliberalnosrs Take it to the relevant talk page. Other people might have a relevant opinion: that is what we do here on RW. Bongolian (talk) 06:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Wordsalad comment

It was 'the reason' for deletion I would have used (had the page survived until I signed in) - in case it amused anyone/could be aptly used elsewhere. Anna Livia (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

OK Bongolian (talk) 18:54, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I might be at fault myself. I do get stupid over edits I don't agree with, both here and Wikipedia lol - Notaliberalnosrs (talk) 03:22, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Some 'passing comments' seem too good to waste :) Anna Livia (talk) 09:46, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Please keep an eye of Hindu nationalism related articles. And please review my edits. I made some improvements on some articles. --ThisIsYeah2 (talk) 18:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the alert, @ThisIsYeah2. For new (un-autopatrolled) users like yourself the [[::Special:RecentChanges]] feed shows a red "!" next to unpatrolled edits. That alerts active editors to verify that the changes are at least reasonable. I see that another editor, User:DuceMoosolini, noticed your edits and thought they were good quality. Keep up the good work and you should get autopatrolled status and then become an editor in short order! Bongolian (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

How can I get rid of the captcha that comes everytime I try to make an edit? --ThisIsYeah2 (talk) 00:41, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

The autopatrolling should have gotten rid of the captcha. Bongolian (talk) 01:00, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I have replied on my talk page. --ThisIsYeah2 (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

New mod election

You've been nominated in the upcoming moderator elections. See the nomination at RationalWiki:Moderator elections/Nominations.

— Dysk (contribs) 03:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Reply mistake?

Why did you ping me in a thread where I made no comments? -Lankaster (talk) 19:57, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

You're right. It's more relevant to the section above on that talk page, but it still pertains to your quotes. Bongolian (talk) 20:00, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Still doesn't make sense, you are replying to this. People cannot read 1,2,3 from Sarsour Talk page. -Lankaster (talk) 20:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

You. You're awesome

Thanks for the work on Horseshoe theory. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 22:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, @Ikanreed! ^{— Unsigned, by: Bongolian / talk / contribs}

This point

I saw you replied to my post, but you didn't answer the second question: "Shouldn't be better to address..." -Lankaster (talk) 19:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Creating David Wood (Christian apologist)

Hey mate, I created this page while trying to figure out how the {{wpr}} format has been implemented on RW. The page here currently redirects to a Wikipedia disambiguation page rather than the article on the actual subject, so I was trying to correct this. What do you suggest is the best solution for fixing this mislinking? NothingToSeeHere (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

The redirect was unnecessary, @NothingToSeeHere. I think what you actually wanted was a "wpa" not a "wpr". See the current page for David Wood for how I fixed it. Bongolian (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Can you take a look at this urgently?

https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:Chicken_coop&diff=prev&oldid=2014100

Not sure why this was taken down. Please read.46.29.2.131 (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

The chicken coop isn't the place to discuss your particular vendetta in your quest of petty witch-hunting of other people. Bring it up to talk pages first, maybe of the person you're accusing of being a sockpuppet perhaps? БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 23:24, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

That is correct. Bongolian (talk) 23:25, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I've probably been here longer than you both, and I know a fake account when I see one... There has been a complete decline in RationalWiki; you're not even patrolling page creations anymore and are just allowing users to add dubious, false and potentially libellous content. As long as someone poses as a liberal or "progressive", you don't even look at what they are writing.46.29.2.131 (talk) 23:34, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Take our advice rather than complaining to us. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:35, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

You claim to been here longer than any of us, yet you can't even settle page info dubiousness properly. БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 23:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

The point here is is not the correctness of the page. It is how you went about pointing it out. You have two options for this to start with: 1) Correct the page yourself. 2) Go to the talk page and discuss the problem. If someone disputes your corrections and you can't resolve it with them, and bringing in other Sysops to the dispute doesn't help: then and only then should you even consider taking it to the Chicken Coop. Bongolian (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I have looked at this, and it is indeed dire. Not sure if moderation action is warranted for the user, but editorial action is probably due on the pages they modified. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 23:58, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Probably my bad, but my red flag when up when I saw yet another accusation of a random user being a Michael Coombs / Kirkegrade / whatever alt and I'm still pretty burnt from all of that drama that has been commonplace. I'll parole the user, but seriously, all of this should have been brought up in their talk pages to begin with rather than straight up chicken coop material БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 00:03, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘OK, so are you able to fix this, @Ikanreed? Bongolian (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I guess so. I'm a bit extreme about these things, one page has only one edit, and that edit includes and outright lie, so I'm tempted to burn the whole page. I don't tend to do half-measures on stuff that seems to be built on lies. But yeah, I can fix it "my way" ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 00:09, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

It's fine to delete it for now. Check the content of the deleted page if we can salvage anything. The content is, after all, still there, but just not for viewing eyes. Then rework the article from the ground up and we hopefully don't have an article that has the potential to poison a person's reputation. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:11, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

What about Robert Plomin's article? Ikanreed has also brought up stuff against it. I don't know exactly what to edit out though. БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 00:13, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I took out the parts that seem to be inaccurate, after a bit of attempting to search. The guys' work is all the fuck over every neonazi hive on the internet, and I don't mind having a quiet "yeah this guy writes racisty stuff with academic pretense" kind of page, given that the actual citations don't seem far off. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 00:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

All right, thanks for cleaning out the dirt. And the BoN / Concerned, I apologize for the vandal binning. I would have paroled you myself if my idiotic twin didn't beat me to it. Recent trolls have shooken me up to have a shoot first, ask questions later attitude especially when I hear the phrases all too much from bad users. БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 00:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@BabyLuigiOnFire Occupational hazard? Just relax. This is a wiki. Bad edits can be undone. Nerd (talk) 00:50, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Well I made a mistake. I felt like I should apologize. *shrug* БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 00:54, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I leave you all alone for more than two hours and you go to defcon twelve over little shit like this? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 01:05, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@BabyLuigiOnFire Sounds like civilized behavior to me. No worries, miss!

@GrammarCommie XO to Captain, I still have my key. Nerd (talk) 01:18, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

GrammarCommie: Pshaw, that's nothing when I sleep for a night and come back to see a freaking chicken coop case between Lankaster and James Earl Cash and it has been developed. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 01:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

BoN if you've been here so long then why don't you have an account? Or are you a sock?Doublethink (talk) 17:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)Doublethink (talk) 17:12, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

He was right it's probably a sock. The acount only has one contrib and it was to delete that chicken coop request.Doublethink (talk) 17:12, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Chuck Schumer

HI Bongolian, I was wondering why you vaporised my Chuck Schumer article. I found it on the to do list and it was just a stub?Doublethink (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Unless you're planning to rapidly expand an article, @Doublethink, it's better to start working on it in the Draft space. I've copied the contents over into Draft space if you want to work on it there: Draft:Chuck Schumer. After you make it missional and expand it, feel free to move it back to Mainspace. Bongolian (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Ok I will do thatDoublethink (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the bone broth research

Thank you for the time and effort. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:36, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Internal links

Thank you for helping out with universal healthcare. But please be advised that having too many internal links concentrated in a section or paragraph can be distracting and thus counterproductive. Nerd (talk) 19:18, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks, @Nerd. Bongolian (talk) 19:33, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome message

Hey, thanks for the welcome message from a few months back. I don't visit here often and I just returned today. I've left many welcome messages on Wikipedia in my time (unfortunately many with a side order of {{test1}}). Auntie Fra (talk) 00:23, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Patrol rights poorly given, thus sayth I.

Why did you give autopatrolled rights to this user? Their only contributions have been poorly concealed vandalism. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 16:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm also gonna have to agree with GC's assessment here. Said user attempts to whitewash articles and disguise it by writing innocent-sounding edit summaries. DuceMoosolini^{Your friendly RW dictator moderator} 17:24, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@GrammarCommie, @DuceMoosolini: That was not me who gave rights to that user, it was @Don Juan who gave the rights and who also took them away.[14] All that I did was add a comment that their rights had been taken away on their talk page (User_talk:EsotericMosleyism). Bongolian (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

My apologies for the misunderstanding, I shall take it up with Don Juan when I have the chance. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 19:07, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Trying to create an article

I am trying to create an article on someone, but every time it comes up "Spam: Contact a sysop to make this edit", how can I get round this? There is no spam in the article. John66 (talk) 19:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@John66, can you tell me the title of the intended article and briefly describe the content? Bongolian (talk) 19:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

It is an article on Malcolm Kendrick, he has written a series of books that claim high cholesterol does not cause heart disease, and there is a conspiracy theory in medicine involving statins. He is a member of THINCS. I have written the article with many references but every-time I submit it, it says it is spam and contact a syop. John66 (talk) 19:49, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@John66, I created the page for you. Try adding to it now. Bongolian (talk) 20:13, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! I created the article. I am French but live in UK, sometimes my language is not that good so there may be a few spelling errors. John66 (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@John66, great! I think some of the diet-related words in the article probably set off a spam filter. This won't happen to you once you become a Sysop. I'll have a look over the page. Bongolian (talk) 20:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Please...

You misrepresented your attack on me when you publicly accused me of trolling. You clearly stated, "spouse for the insane child." Spare us a definition of insanity, and you clearly do not distinguish between "psychological issues" and "insane."

I believe a public retraction of your unfounded accusation against me of trolling is appropriate. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 17:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Begone, ye foul troll. Bongolian (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You'd never make it as a Mod. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 19:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Is the Ricardo Duchesne page displaying?

When I log out it shows up as a deleted page.Account (talk) 04:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes @Account, it's displaying. I think @Spriggina deleted it and then undeleted it? Bongolian (talk) 04:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I recreated the page by finishing the article after Spriggina deleted it for being unfinished and missing citations.Account (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@Account: What color is this link and what happens when you click on it:

Ricardo Duchesne

Bongolian (talk) 04:37, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

It works now.Account (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Please note

My contribution to improve a mainspace article. Your effort to suppress Talk page discussion and "piling on" garbage in the mainspace backfired. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 20:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

You misinterpret my motivations. I simply aim to keep red herrings and conspiracy theory-inspired ideas out of mainspace. I didn't suppress anything that you wrote I just troll-collapsed it. Bongolian (talk) 20:44, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Well you fucked up. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 20:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

See, a person doesn't have to add tons of hypertext to mainspace to improve an article or have an impact. Much occurs in discussion and research. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 20:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Nobs, you're a total fuckup. Bongolian (talk) 20:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Hey, your the one who added "conspiracy theory-inspired ideas," to mainspace, not me, Fool. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 20:57, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

You seem to think your some kind of God

I don't know what you’re deal is, but you seem to think your some kind of God, literally reversing a minor Wiki edit of no more than a couple words without even reading it. ^{— Unsigned, by: Hongon / talk / contribs}

That's you're. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 07:45, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Also, I don't think that reverting a minor edit qualifies a person for a god complex. Just saying. RoninMacbeth (talk) 07:54, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Me neither but I just want to let Bongolian handle this. Irritating grammar errors get me. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 07:59, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

In my view the minor edit did not improve the sentence. Bongolian (talk) 08:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

redirect

I would like to turn Purplepill movement into a redirect to purple pill. Could you undelete please so either I or someone else could do it? Preferably with the page history intact. Thanks.Hipppppppy (talk) 05:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

No, @Hipppppppy, we don't need such a redirect. You can argue your case in the Saloon, as @GrammarCommie suggested. Bongolian (talk) 05:08, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

re: Turning Point UK

It's still early days for the organisation. I'm waiting for them to actually do something like they promised (which I gather is campaign in public against universities and send threatening letters to teachers), but right now it's just them being mocked by the left and right with founding members quitting over internal disputes. Give it, say, one week. If they don't do anything interesting after a week, then I'll concede they're an irrelevance and we'll do a merger.-- Forerunner (talk) 12:18, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

OK, that's reasonable, @Forerunner. Bongolian (talk) 17:35, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Discord

Are you on it? RoninMacbeth (talk) 07:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

No, I'm not, @RoninMacbeth. Bongolian (talk) 07:30, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

OK. Just asking. RoninMacbeth (talk) 07:31, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

As to point 4...

As to point four ("A conspiracy-believing nutcase has attempted to assassinate a Congressional representative and did kill others during the attempt (2011 Tucson shootingWikipedia's W.svg)"), now please link the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords to human trafficing, so that your logic makes some sense. You conveniently left out the fact that the President of the United States raised the issue of human trafficing while women honoring sufferegettes sat on their hands. IMO, my comment should be restored and you should stop abusing your Mod powers. nobs ^{piss in my ear} 22:53, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@RobSmith If you have anything to say about this, take it to the coop, not here. Bongolian (talk) 01:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Dude

Why don't you just leave my buddy @RobSmith alone and stop starting HCMs? What a Wonderful World (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Coop

A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment.

Conspirate (talk) 13:07, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

request to block sock

82.132.215.120 and Liberosaurus Rex are vekimekim socks (spell it backwards because of filter), can you block them? As proof, when Rex lost his autopatrol rights, he exposed and edited as his IP 82.132.215.120 -- the IP matches vekimekim socks on his article talk page (take a look scroll near bottom).Air Force One (talk) 22:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Discuss first, then revert

per established rules. nobs^{I'm all yea'res} 04:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

We already had this discussion in the moderator forum. Give it a rest. Bongolian (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

If it will make you happy, I can go to CP right now, add this footnote to the image on the Obama page, and then you'd have to drop your pointless reference to Brietbart and update the page anyhow.

• Joondeph, Brian, "Obama Was the Original Birther", American Thinker, September 18, 2016. ^{— Unsigned, by: RobSmith / talk / contribs}

The author of that piece stated the falsehood that you repeated, so it changes nothing. Bongolian (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"This other far right psycho also agrees with the racist thing I said, so ha!" Fuck off, rob. You don't own the article about you, but you do own your own words. Please eat them. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:30, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ikanreed You might care to vote now that I have a proposed revision: Conservapedia talk:RobSmith#Edit War, RobSmith v. Bongolian. Bongolian (talk) 20:20, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I would, but voting twice is frowned upon. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 20:22, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Bongolian Your whole argument is still A + B + Brietbart + A turkey baster = Nobs is a racist. In point of fact, I was mediating a dispute with neutral language, not expressing a personal viewpoint. You miss the entire context. nobs^{I'm all yea'res} 21:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I addressed your text Conservapedia talk:RobSmith#Edit War, RobSmith v. Bongolian.Bongolian (talk) 23:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

You did not. I was blocked at CP from April 2012 to May 2015 when birtherism was in full swing. As the "self-appointed director of counterintelligence," most of that crap would never have been there if I wasn't blocked. If I had delete powers now, I'd do away with at least 4 or 5 of the 6 worst pages on the subject. You've come to you're own conclusions, and won't let facts persuade you. Don't tell me I do not have RW's mission at heart. nobs^{I'm all yea'res} 04:42, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit War Discussion

I have started a vote here to determine which version of the page to use. Please contribute a difflink with the version you want us to use, and defend why it should be implemented. I'll try to get people involved, so that it doesn't get ignored. RoninMacbeth (talk) 06:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"Fishhook theory" is a popular joke among the internet left.

Or not-so-much joke? They actually believe it in exactly the same ways that centrists believe in horseshoe theory. Did you revert the IP because it was fringe? Or because it was uncited? Or what? Edit summaries are good. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 17:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ikanreed It looked like a joke from my quick look. Feel free to add it back if it's anything more than that, hopefully with a reference. Bongolian (talk) 18:11, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Cabal

You are hereby invited to the Cabal, of which there is none. — Oxyaena ^{Poke me} 00:14, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Question

What is this a-b-d crap and why did I get sucked into it to the point that someone impersonated me on a random forum? DuceMoosolini^{Your friendly RW dictator moderator} 06:43, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini It's a code for Abd ul-Rahman Lomax, a notorious internet troll who has been banned from multiple internet fora. Trolls do suck. It's kind of funny though since it's all so improbable; I've made a joke of it at the top of this page. Bongolian (talk) 06:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019

A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment.

2607:FB90:90E1:B391:0:3:EC2D:B301 (talk) 20:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Response

I didn't change anything you edited. All I did was add a warning label to the website. Aurelius (talk) 23:20, 23 February 2016 (EST)

Why?

Why did you revert my edits about Catholicism? Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:04, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kingdamian1, your rationale for deleting the text seemed weak. What constitutes a "respectable source"? Evangelical Protestants have made the accusation that Catholics worship idols, e.g., this group: [15]. Bongolian (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

I know... But rationalwiki clearly defines Catholics as Christian, and it defines Christianity as monotheistic. So it's a bit hypocritical to then suggest that Catholics are polytheists. --Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:23, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kingdamian1, perhaps we can reword it with an added reference? Bongolian (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

(EC) Not to mention that the suggestion that saints are deities would be laughed out of the room by any Catholic congregation. 2A02:1810:4D34:DC00:2876:3C83:70A9:92EA (talk) 23:32, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

I am all for it. --Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

The point of the article is debunking the 'Not a Religion' view so they could worship 10,000 gods for all the article cares. Catholicism's centralised hierarchy should be discussed as well as the infallibility of the pope as these definitely disprove the 'Relationship with God' view imo. Féinléiriú (talk) 13:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

fyi

I'm your sockpuppet too now according to a certain resident crank. [16] — Dysk (contribs) 00:37, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

"It is clear that all the accounts posting on the RationalWiki coop are accounts are operated by the same person to create the illusion of support."

And signed by "Oliver S" (as in "Oliver Smith"?). I think this one is a troll, but can Conservapedia smell this one out? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Impersonating so many people at once does get tiring. Bongolian (talk) 04:11, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

To be honest, while I hate to give a troll any credit for anything, I wouldn't doubt that the guy is right simply because I think Dysklyver was socking on CP. User "Dysklyver," "Nadelik," and "Arthur Kerensa" all edit with client signature "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.98 Safari/537.36" (Dysklyver asked me to post his checkuser logs, so I don't consider this doxxing) despite each account coming from different parts of the world. I rarely ever see anyone but myself (when I edit from the computer at one of my jobs) edit using Linux, so it would be a huge coincidence for someone to just happen to be using the same exact operating system and browser versions as him, and it is ridiculous to think that someone not only knew that checkusers would have access to that data and knew what combination to use, but went to the effort of using that information to impersonate Dyskliver on a site he is barely active on. Add to that he quickly changed his username on RationalWiki after that, which is interestingly enough exactly what Colonel Sanders / Enchanted13 did when I caught him with his pants down using checkuser on Conservapedia (I have geographical evidence in addition to similar OS/browser evidence linking his good-hand CP account with his bad-hand "EiK" type socks). Now, for what it's worth, these more recent troll accounts have no technical link to Dysklyver's three CP accounts, however, they are using datacenter proxies, so who knows. The OliverS account was also using datacenter proxies, and I'm thinking "OliverS" is the same as "Bongolian" and "Dysklyver is back."

All considered, I don't think there's enough evidence to take action against Bongolian, however, this is something to think about in the next election. Bye for now, RationalWiki. What a Wonderful World (talk) 01:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I almost forgot to point out... notice "D" undid Bongolian's (a moderator) block barely into a coop case. D was clearly getting nervous when LGM stated that she didn't consider my posts to be harassment. Something is fishy here... What a Wonderful World (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC) @LeftyGreenMario

It seems like one big fuckin' conspiracy, doesn't it? Cosmikdebris (talk) 01:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

He's probably a member of the CIA and the New World Order too. :P What a Wonderful World (talk) 01:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘@LeftyGreenMario This is what happens when we're lenient towards thoroughly unproductive trolls.[17] Bongolian (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I totally think you should implement a 90/10 rule. Especially considering I do most of my non-vandal editing as an IP anyway. What a Wonderful World (talk) 01:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Only the New World Order, and the Cabal. What about the IPs? You are being a bit stingy on the details man. Also if you do your non-vandal editing as an IP, then what do you do logged in? Also if you want to pick this up on my talk page instead I am sure Bongolian would be chuffed. — Dysk (contribs) 01:39, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Or, Morris, you could stop the vague speculation/concern trolling that you're so fond of ... Given it boarders dangerously close to harrassment... Just a thought... ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 03:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC)