User talk:Bongolian/Archive4

Martin Van Buren

I have started the Martin Van Buren now from scratch now ^{— Unsigned, by: Usdas / talk / contribs} Requesting thread archival (why?) Bongolian (talk)

Can I please edited the Hollywood Conservatives list

Also Could we reopen it to General people again as well? It's been three years since the incident. Maybe things will be different now? ^{— Unsigned, by: Darth Vader 180 / talk / contribs}

You're not off to a good start with your first edit being so poorly formatted. Bongolian (talk) 19:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

question

is there anyway I can move/rename articles? Ernor (talk) 13:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Once you show that you can make reasonable edits, you may be given permission to do that. What do you want renamed? Bongolian (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

This page needs to be renamed for a new Afd: RationalWiki:Articles_for_deletion/Aurelio_J._Figueredo. Can be renamed to Aurelio_J._Figueredo (1st) (archive, or whatever). Ernor (talk) 00:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, done. Bongolian (talk) 00:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

thanks, the only other I can see is Fróði Debes. these two are poor articles of only a few lines. It's unclear how they got accepted in first place. Ernor (talk) 01:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ernor OK, also done. Bongolian (talk) 03:44, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Account deletion question

If for privacy or any other reason I need this account deleted, what steps would I have to take? As well can the username be changed prior to deletion? --Valeria22 (talk) 20:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

@Valeria22 We don't have a procedure for deleting accounts. We generally honor requests for account renaming. Requests for account renaming is generally done here: RationalWiki:Requests to change username. We also will hide personal information upon request. For for hiding requests, you can contact any moderator. The moderator list is found at the top of this page: RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation. If you prefer that the request not be made public, you can send an email to a moderator. Bongolian (talk) 22:54, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting the troll edit on my user page.--Max Sinister (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Indira Gandhi

Gandhi was a dictator, so was she a communist or a fascist?

Also, I have an article detailing how Putin relates to the great replacement:https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/great-replacement-theory-trump-putin-lie-b2083656.html Rational Dude (talk) 12:55, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

That's fine to add text and a reasonable citation for confirmation along with the appropriate category. Bongolian (talk) 14:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think Gandhi could have been called a dictator for the entirety of her career, certainly during the 1975-1977 State of Emergency though. Dictators and Dictatorships don't have to neatly fall into communist or fascist categories. Bongolian (talk) 15:13, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Alright. Also, I removed atheophobia from the page for the right stuff because it wasn't explained why in the article or sourced. Rational Dude (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Putin

Why do you keep undoing my edit on Putin? He is a world war 3 edgelord by annexing territory and sending forces to fight. It's a half serious/half joking heading. Rational Dude (talk) 17:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Your section title does not encapsulate the contents of that section: edgelord ("a person who affects a provocative or extreme persona, especially online"[1]), i.e. someone hiding behind an anonymous persona trying to provoke. The contents are about Putin's imperialist ambitions. He is not hiding, everyone knows who he is. He is not trying to provoke, he is now actively trying to commit genocide. And by the period of time in the section (2021-2022), Putin had already seized part of Ukraine (Donbas/Luhansk and Crimea in 2014) in what we now know was a prelude to the full-scale invasion. Bongolian (talk) 17:53, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

"World war 3 edgelord" is a joke reference to John Oliver's show on Putin in last week tonight. Rational Dude (talk) 18:42, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Which isn't even cited on the page as far as I can see. Bongolian (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Should I cite it in the paragraph? Rational Dude (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

What's the full quote? Bongolian (talk) 19:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Here's the full quote and the source:“As we are all now painfully aware, Vladimir Putin, Russian president and World War III edgelord, began an assault on the second-largest country in Europe this week, shelling several cities and sending troops across the border. It has been horrifying to watch, and CNN, during its coverage of air raid sirens in Kyiv, somehow found a way to make it even worse with this terrible transition to break.” Rational Dude (talk) 20:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

It's reasonable for a quote. I still don't think edgelord should be in the section title though. Bongolian (talk) 22:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Very well. Where and how may I put it in the paragraph? Rational Dude (talk) 22:38, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Unless you can figure out how it would flow with the surrounding text, I'd put it at the top. Bongolian (talk) 22:48, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

I was thinking of putting it as a quote above the paragraph but below the header. Rational Dude (talk) 22:52, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

OK. Bongolian (talk) 23:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Alt history collab essay

Am I allowed to make a collaborative essay for alternate history scenarios? Rational Dude (talk) 22:03, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Bongolian (talk) 22:26, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Rational Dude (talk) 23:10, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Request

Please don’t ban me. I know I ignored orders not to make the categories, but I was impatient and I didn’t get a clear answer on whether I could make the categories or I couldn’t. Rational Dude (talk) 13:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

I proposed topic ban on ATIM, not a total ban. I noticed that you've seen this now. Bongolian (talk) 17:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

I already saw this a while ago. I will do my best not to fiddle with the categories after this, but I have a thing with categorizing because of my ocd, which can be a good or a bad thing depending on the situation. Rational Dude (talk) 20:54, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Problematic article

See Talk:Whiteness#Is_this_article_a_parody.3 216.238.112.192 (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Para-fascists

Would it be a good idea to bring back the category? There are some people who can be categorized as para-fascists, like marine le pen and dick cheney, just to name a few. Rational Dude (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Technically we already have "alt-right" and "alt-lite". Dick Cheney is also a piece of shit but he's a neocon, not a neo-fascist. Also Le Pen is already categorized as a fascist, so there's no need for the para-fascist category. Carthage (talk) 20:53, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright. But dick cheney does have some legitimate authoritarian characteristics. Rational Dude (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

There's a difference between authoritarianism and fascism. Cheney's not a populist. Fascists like Trump, Le Pen, and Meloni are. Carthage (talk) 21:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

The para-fascist category is too vague, so is open to dispute. Bongolian (talk) 22:29, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Kane/Smith/CancelWatch

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

Reply to your comment

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

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

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

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

If you think this is a good idea, I could provide some sources (mostly about our book) that discuss our anti-creationism work. I mean actual published sources, not Tweets or Wikipedia diffs. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 06:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I just checked your permissions (autopatrolled) and the page protection of Talk:Emily Willoughby (allow autopatrolled). I don't see why you can't edit there. BobJohnson said that the Wikidrama needs to be deleted, and I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Bongolian (talk) 06:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what's causing the problem, but when I try to edit that talk page, it gives an error message saying this: "This page has been locked. You have insufficient permissions to edit."

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

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

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

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

On the other hand if you feel that it's up to me to make the necessary changes, please let me know that, so that I won't end up waiting indefinitely for someone else to do it. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 21:52, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Once you have ten edits, you should be granted the autoconfirmed status. Plutocow (talk) 21:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Okay. Do you and Bongolian recommend that I wait until I have ten edits, and then make the agreed-upon changes to those articles myself? As I said, I'm wary about heavily editing an article about myself or about someone I know in real life (doing that is strongly discouraged at Wikipedia), but I'll do it if it's what the other people here think I should do. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

It's best not to edit the page of someone with whom one is closely associated. Commenting on the associated talk page is generally fine. Bongolian (talk) 01:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. In that case, could you please try improving the Willoughby article yourself (as well as the one about me)? We seem to be in agreement about what sorts of changes need to be made, but I don't think those changes ever will actually be made to the articles unless you make them. --Tetrapteryx (talk) 02:16, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Could you please look at this?

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

Archive.is

So I just copypaste the link, click "save" and the page has been archived? I've never used it, so I don't know if it's that simple. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 20:50, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

There are two boxes: one for search and one for save. If the search finds nothing, it will ask you if you want to save the page. Bongolian (talk) 02:25, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Gopstein

He justifies having the categories of anti lgbt bigots, homophobes, and transphobes because he and his organization are virulently anti gay, and he also justifies having the category of Israel because he relates to the country, and itamar ben gvir also has the category. Rational Dude (talk) 13:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

While that may be the case, there was no text on the page that would have justified those categories. This is how you got sanctioned in the first place. You might be able to get the sanction removed at some point, but not by adding categories, and especially not by adding unjustified categories. Bongolian (talk) 16:37, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I understand. But they are justified, I just should’ve added the text in first. Rational Dude (talk) 20:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Not to mention, I did add the sources into his page, didn’t you see them? Rational Dude (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Adding such categories without justifying text and citations is particularly bad for living people be cause of the potential for libel. Bongolian (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I know, that’s why I cited it. If it wasn’t specific enough, I can send you a source proving it and showing it isn’t libel. Rational Dude (talk) 18:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Question

How do I appeal my topic ban? I’ll use sources for the articles. I get the problem now, putting in categories without supporting texts. Rational Dude (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry but the Topic ban is Indefinite ←§ Edward the eight (talk) 17:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Is it permanent? Rational Dude (talk) 17:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

It is not necessarily permanent, but it is indefinite. Give it a couple of months of not violating the ban, then you can appeal for a rescinding of the ban on RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation, and state your reason(s) why it should be rescinded. Bongolian (talk) 17:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright, will do. Thanks for letting me know. Rational Dude (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Twitter as a source?

Hi Bongolian, if you have time could you please take a look at this exchange (based on using Twitter as a source)? Thanks. Edger Halogen (talk) 22:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I added a comment there. Bongolian (talk) 23:24, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at it. (Your comment was placed in the section above the one in question.) Edger Halogen (talk) 23:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I thought that was what you wanted me to look at. I'll look again. Bongolian (talk) 23:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Jill Stein's a Russian asset?

I admittedly haven't paid any attention to the Green Party and its former nominees, but do you have a citation that Stein is a Russian asset? Carthage (talk) 18:58, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

@Carthage, Hillary Clinton accused her of that in 2012 and 2016.[2] 'Asset' does not mean that Stein is on the Russian payroll necessarily, but there was that notorious photo of her appearance in Moscow dining at Putin's table with Michael Flynn, celebrating RT's anniversary.[3] She may think she's not a Russian asset, but there's certainly enough evidence about her that she couldn't succeed in suing anyone for libel about such an accusation. Bongolian (talk) 19:14, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

A book for you

While I understand that, despite your excellent job at the Libertarian paradise article, you don't a lot care about economics, you seem to care about American politics and history. The great economist Alan S Blinder published a book called "A Monetary and Fiscal History of the United States, 1961-2021". The title might suggest that the author is finishing Milton Friedman's job (his most important work is called "A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960"), but he's in fact a center/center-left moderate democrat, and he argues that the GOP macroeconomic policy has been misleaded over the last few decades, while the Dems have been, on average, in the right path. This is indeed a bold statement, but he does make his case very well. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 16:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the book recommendation. Indeed, my understanding of economics is not very deep, being limited to some of the key concepts. Bongolian (talk) 16:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination

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

Bongolian (talk) 16:01, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Ping question

I could start a discussion on the userbox. But then I'd want to ping recently-active people who use this on their profile (since it'd be basically editing their user page). If defined as people who have edited in 2023 (and aren't A somebody, who's banned for a while), that would be twenty-three people. Do you think I ought to just do it and people won't care, or is that a bit much, pinging a lot of people at once? Chillpilled (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

If they're at least semi-active. I think it should be fine. Better to give fair warning then none at all. Bongolian (talk) 21:06, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Mastodon account

What is the RW Mastodon account? Euromec (talk) 10:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@Euromec, it's @RationalWiki@universeodon.com. Bongolian (talk) 17:18, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

2023 Mod election

David's got the election booth set up and he'll turn it on on November 25. Cheers! —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 23:50, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I need your expert eye for a second

Bongo, if you have the time, can you read the Heartland Institute article?

Doesn't it seem kinda... weird? Like, some ChatGPT stuff, or something. I just saw a load of bare URLs so I started formatting them as per the manual of style, but I slowly read the whole thing bit by bit and it's really clunky. "According to the New York Times", "Le Monde reports", "as reported in the Washington Times". Who the f@ck here writes like that? Where are the Goat jokes?

I'll be back later to do more of the refs, but in the meantime, can we promote the article? I don't think it's Bronze worthy, personally. (Or not yet anyway, I reckon I'll edit the whole damn thing later, if I have the time. Not to a Bronze level, mind you, but something more streamlined at least.)

Vaya con Dios. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 04:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Almost all of it was written before chatbots were widely available, so that seems unlikely. A lot of it was written by a BoN or BoNs. It could be that some of the clunkiness is from a non-native English speaker. Bongolian (talk) 05:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I did initially think that English wasn't the BoN's first language, but stuff like "Morris, a morbidly obese, pretentious dandy infamous for his 19th century bow ties and lingo laced with obscure Latin and Old French phrases" is a mechanically difficult sentence (I remember when my only language was Hungarian. Took me a LONG time before I could put together a sentence like that in English). Then I thought "Oh, maybe it's directly copy pasted from the refs?" But that doesn't seem to be the case either...? Also, "supra", like "see above" in Latin, I think? That's pretty fancy stuff.

Anyway, I did some pruning. Take a gander, if you'd like. I think it's a bit better, but I'll probably have to come back to it at some point.

Peace and friendship. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 15:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this page. I have done my own clean up and moved it to bronze. Bongolian (talk) 22:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Good shit man. Reads a hell of a lot better now than it did before. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 22:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Indefinite block? Really?!

You seriously blocked me from editing the cognitive dissonance page indefinitely? I would have understood being blocked for a few days, but indefinitely?! Come on, that sounds over the top. I rollbacked your edits with the intent of opening a discussion about my mini-essays on the talk page (which I would have said in the edit summary if rollbacks allowed edit summaries); I'll agree that they're not perfect (and that the page as a whole needs to be reworked and improved), but I would prefer having the mini-essays be refined rather than scrapped entirely, since they were all written with the intent of clarifying content on the page that would otherwise have been ambiguous. Anyways, can someone please lift that block? I'd like to be part of the reworking process. --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Instead of the unexplained rollback, it would’ve been better to take it to the talkpage. And besides, while I agree that it should’ve been temporary, you did repeatedly add those “mini-essays” that several users have told you several times not to put in. It would instead be more prudent to just add new paragraphs if that’s what you want to put into articles (where appropriate). --Goatspeed. _{Stop the War On Secularism}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 01:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

If you'll agree to stop adding "mini-essays" to articles, and to consistently add appropriate citations for any extended text that you add to mainspace pages, then yes I would agree to removing the block. Bongolian (talk) 01:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I have decided to make it a really long page-block instead of a perma. While these new partial blocks are still a gray zone in terms of blocking policy, I felt a perma was excessive for a good-faith user with a not-so-good editing style. But feel free to make it perma again if you wish --Goatspeed. _{Stop the War On Secularism}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 01:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Like I said, my intention was to take it to the talk page, but rollbacks don't allow edit summaries. --Luigifan18 (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

I didn't know about the & # 3 9 ; substitution trick to getting the inferno bot to archive pages with apostrophes in the name. I had always assumed it was a bug. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 23:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It would be nice if someone would fix {{talkpage}} or {{archivelinks}} to work properly on apostrophic pages. Bongolian (talk) 02:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hey

You already know I’m back, but I wanted to say hi.

I also wanted to ask if I’m allowed to regain my sysop powers after a while and appealing my category ban. Rational Dude (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

If you want to do it, you have to go to ATIM. You probably won't succeed though so soon after your block expired, so it's probably best to have patience and exercise goodwill. Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I can wait. Rational Dude (talk) 23:53, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Don't mind me, just testing the filter

If you are reading this message, it means the test was successful! FilterTest2024 (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry you did WHAT?!

Agent 86

Agent 99

So I was reading your User page (I know, I know, shouldn't be procrastinating) and, and... what?

“”Joseph Mobutu — probably observed him at a distance fishing on a remote riverbank

You saw Mobutu Sese Seko.

The dictator of the Congo.

CAUALLY FISHING IN A RIVER?!

What the actual... Bongo, I'm gonna ask you straight. And yeah, yeah, we are on the internet, don't give away your personal details, etc. etc. but I just have to know...

Are you an international hitman/CIA secret agent? Is THAT what your flipping day job is?

(I'm so sorry, please don't kill me for revealing your identity...) - Rairyu75 (Talk) 06:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

And here, from my own skimming of that section, I was focused on Dworkin's book reading and Solanas's play. Chillpilled (talk) 06:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I was on a vacation of sorts in eastern Zaïre in the Goma area. At a clearing in the distance there was a fat man on a simple stool near the river holding a fishing rod. there were two soldiers standing on either side of him. Our small group didn't approach since we had no need to, and just continued on our way. I believe it was our informal tour guide who suggested that that was who it must have been. Bongolian (talk) 08:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

What I find interesting is, why did you choose Zaire/DR Congo of all places to spend your vacation, Bongolian? It seems like a very different place to visist, it gets around 0.03% of all turists in the world.[4] GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 12:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Is there a problem with visiting the DRC? The fact it only gets so many tourists is a boon IMO. Carthage (talk) 12:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

No? Also, the country has little to no infrastructure, of course it won't receive many tourists, even if it's an interesting place to visit. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 12:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I am well aware of the country's relative lack of infrastructure. I don't see, even with that in mind, for someone who's willing to go off the beaten path a little bit, why DRC is such an unusual place to visit? Carthage (talk) 13:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

You can check here[5] why only those that really want an adventure go to the DRC: you can't take pictures, you need an expensive visa, it's dangerous, the country is malarial... Anyway, I definitely respect Bongolian for going to such a different place, despite all the shortcomings. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I've already read that page. I suppose it's just differing standards. I don't consider it "unusual" to visit places like the DRC, but I might be unusual in that regard. Carthage (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

NOOOOOOOOO you pair of silly goats! I just explained this! He even said it further up the page: " a vacation of sorts." Which means it was work related. Which means he is a HITMAN. He was there to ASSASINATE someone! - Rairyu75 (Talk) 15:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

An assumption I will make (given that Bongolian used "Zaire" and Mobutu Sese Seko's lifespan) is that Bongolian visited the country before the 1990s, where things (while still rather rocky) weren't as bad as they currently are now, and some degree of tourism was possible for the really adventurous traveler. Douglas Adams actually managed to visit Zaire in 1989 for his documentary on near-extinct animals for the BBC, Last Chance to See. Even then, the park he visited (Garamba National Park) was very little visited due to the nightmares of Zaire's bureaucracy and the remoteness of the area. But at least the violent conflict was toned down then; a visit was possible. BobJohnson (talk) 15:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Are you implying that Bongolian is Agent 47? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 16:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘OK, you got me. I'm either Agent 86 or Agent 99, but I'm not telling which one… Chaos would result if I did. Zaïre didn't have much armed conflict when I was there (early 1990s). I certainly didn't see any. Bongolian (talk) 18:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Edit review request

Hey, I recently undid a BoN edit at Internet Research Agency that looked like it was harming the page. However, I'm not fully confident of my judgment in this case, so I'd like a second opinion. You have a track record of trimming down my more… out-there edits, so could you please take a look at it? --Luigifan18 (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The edit appeared to me to not not change the meaning of the text significantly. Is there something specific in the edit that you thought was bad? Bongolian (talk) 05:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The big red flag to me was the removal of "The actual trolls in question are often just young people looking for a job." I dunno, that looked a bit like it was demonizing Russia. It makes it look a bit like everyone there (by which I mean the Internet Research Agency, not Russia as a whole) is a psychotic weirdo who delights in politically destabilizing other nations. --Luigifan18 (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, the BoN changes the tone a bit, but the key was that the BoN removed a good citation. So, yes, you were right to revert. Bongolian (talk) 18:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

What the bloody hell did you make me listen to?

I am now 12 minutes into this damn thing. What? Why...? Who? When? I don't... I'm so confused. What the f@ck is this?! - Rairyu75 (Talk) 03:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

You can find their strange history here: The Shaggs. Bongolian (talk) 05:17, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Quotes

I noticed you took down some of the quotes I added to some pages. I don't have a problem with that at all, but is there any chance I could add them back if I include a proper citation? I figured I should ask before I do anything. BJA2112 (talk) 04:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

With quality citations, yes, if the quote bears relevance to the article. Quotes from fiction (from Hamilton, the musical or from games), generally not unless it's about the fiction in question. Bongolian (talk) 05:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

So I can't add quotes from fiction to pages at all? I just want to be doubly sure, because there are other quotes from fiction on other pages that I didn't add. I mean, I will absolutely abide by that if you say so, I just want to be sure. I also want to make it clear that I'm not trying to start a fight or complain or anything. BJA2112 (talk) 06:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

You had a quote attributed that you attributed to Burr, but it was from the Hamilton musical. The other fiction quotes that I saw that you had added seemed rather tangential or obscure. Bongolian (talk) 08:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I thought I'd stated as such it was fr the musical, but I guess I didn't. So if the fiction in question is more well known/mainstream, it's okay? Again, not trying to start a fight or complain or be a troublemaker or anything, I just want to be absolutely 100% regarding possible future edits. BJA2112 (talk) 08:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

It is just confusing having fictitious quotes in articles that are supposed to be factual. Bongolian (talk) 08:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

So no more fictional quotes? Again, just to me absolutely sure. Also, I hope I'm not coming off as sounding stupid or anything, I just want to be absolutely sure so I can keep it in mind for future edits. BJA2112 (talk) 09:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘If you're so keen on adding them, it's best to ask a sysop or mod. It doesn't have to be me. Bongolian (talk) 18:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Caught a vandal red-handed.

I just rollbacked blatant vandalism from some schmuck calling themselves "thebraveone" at the Alan Watt article. They also appear to have already made a backup account, as if we wouldn't notice two accounts with very similar names being created and making trouble at the same time. Where's a facepalm emoji when you need one?! --Luigifan18 (talk) 14:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I gave them a short block for first offense. Bongolian (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Quotes (again)

Hey, I hope I've been cooperative enough will everything you and the other mods have told me regarding quotes on pages so far. I like to think I've been doing a better job of it so far. Also for the future, if I think a fictional quote would fit for a certain page, I'll make sure to ask someone first. BJA2112 (talk) 23:38, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, from what I've seen so far. Thank you. Bongolian (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Cats on sandbox

Hi, @Bongolian! I have noticed that your page User:Bongolian/Test2 appears on the homepage in the category of Creationism. After some research I was told that this is not supposed to happen and that sandbox pages should de-cat their content. I do not know how else to say it, so I will just kindly ask you to remove the categories. :) I am new to the wiki so I can't know for certain if what I am saying is correct - if you believe that what you are doing is correct and should remain unchanged, feel free to disregard this notice. ULTRACOMFY (talk) 11:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I had forgotten that page was still there. I've deleted it since I no longer need it. Bongolian (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

*facepalm*

So, we just got a new user by the name of "SenõrChismeOléOléOlé". Isn't "Ole Ole Ole" how Ken ends a lot of his weird rants? Who does he think he's kidding?!? --Luigifan18 (talk) 04:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. It used to be on the list of block reasons, but it was a mystery to me as to why. Bongolian (talk) 07:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

What the flying fuck…

Some BoN is building some sort of word salad thing called "Smass". I don't know what to make of it, except it's clearly wandalism. --Luigifan18 (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the head's up, @Luigifan18. I've deleted the page and given a block to the BoN. Bongolian (talk) 03:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. You have no idea how hard it was for me to resist yelling at the BoN to make a sandbox for… whatever the fuck they were doing. --Luigifan18 (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Request

Am I allowed to appeal my topic ban for the categories and have my mod powers back? I didn’t abuse them and I won’t abuse them. Rational Dude (talk) 05:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you are allowed to appeal topic bans. Generally, one should wait a reasonable length of time since the ban (it's been several months in your case, so I would say you qualify on this point), and then make a reasoned request in RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation. Generally, one should also truthfully claim that one hasn't violated the ban. In your case, though I would have to wonder about the Enrique Peña Nieto page where it seems that you added categories, some of which seemed to me to be unsupported by the existing text. Bongolian (talk) 05:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I admit I was rushing on that one, but I was not attempting to spread misinformation. Sometimes I forget to edit my mistakes on pages because of my dyslexia, which is why I sometimes have spelling errors or improper links on some pages. Plus, I currently only add categories on drafts, which I believe doesn’t count on my topic ban as it relates to mainspace pages. Rational Dude (talk) 05:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I didn't follow the whole timeline for Enrique Peña Nieto, but if you only put the categories in the draft and @Natsuki Marx caused them to appear in mainspace, to me that would seem to be a reasonable excuse. Bongolian (talk) 06:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

That’s the truth, I didn’t touch the categories once they entered mainspace. Rational Dude (talk) 06:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Like I said, you're welcome to make an appeal. Bongolian (talk) 06:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Will I have a chance at my appeal being granted though? Rational Dude (talk) 06:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. It would depend on a vote, which I can't predict. It's best to be truthful and explain anything that might appear suspicious such as the Peña article. Bongolian (talk) 06:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Of course. I guess I have nothing to worry about. Rational Dude (talk) 06:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Dealing with ban evasion

Hi Bongolian, I've got a question. I was recently asked for advice about the fact that Smith's ban apparently isn't being enforced, probably because I'm the only semi-active user here who's known for caring about that issue. This and this are the most recent examples of him evading it. The IP user making those edits is obviously Smith - the IP's geolocation matches, and Smith linked to the same article on Twitter just a few hours before those edits.

I have no opinion about whether that source should be cited in the article or not; my question is only about how to address the ban evasion issue. At RationalWiki, what is the correct venue to report ban evasion and have it addressed? Tetrapteryx (talk) 15:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

The best venue to discuss ban evasion is RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation. It can also be brought up in RationalWiki:Saloon_bar. I think you're right that that's plausibly Smith. Bongolian (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Unfortunately, it seems very cumbersome to have to make a new thread at one of those noticeboards for each one of Smith's ipsocks. If I did that, I'd have to start a new thread there every month or two, and I don't have that kind of time to devote to editing here. I think it would be valuable if sometime in the future, RationalWiki could set up a dedicated process for reporting ban evasion, along the lines of what exists at Wikipedia. Tetrapteryx (talk) 16:26, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

You can also contact one of the moderators, including myself. Bongolian (talk) 16:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

That IP address was not Smith. I have used some VPNs to edit controversial race content regarding Kirkegaard. Smith is involved in 4 lawsuits, he doesn't edit this website. I have received death threats and email abuse from the usual suspects for editing this topic area. I generally now want to use my account to edit mostly diet-related content. My account is being stalked off-site by these far-right extremists, so it's just easier for privacy concerns to use an IP to edit anything related to Dutton, Kirkegaard and their associates on occasion. Johns (talk) 11:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

So, I see you've now reverted Bongolian's block of that IP.

I found the evidence convincing enough that it was Smith: 1) The only 2 edits from that IP were on the Kirkegaard page 2) It was on a topic known to be contentious between Smith and Kirkegaard, 3) It was from London where Smith is known to live in or near (due to his lawsuit). Bongolian (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

138.68.180.65 is a VPN that comes with Norton 360 Software and McAfee (I have multiple systems and use both). Basically you click on the "fastest location" option. It doesn't matter where you live in the UK, it will always give you the quickest VPN in the London region. You can easily look up this IP range [6] [7]. Over the last year, I have made dozens of edits on the 138 range. If you check the Mankind Quarterly article, you will see I heavily edited it in February and March 2024. Emil Kirkegaard is in frequent email and discord communication with Jonathan Kane. This entire drama that Kane has drummed up here is not really about Smith, it's because Emil Kirkgaard doesn't want that new newspaper article put on RationalWiki. I don't think we should give in to these far-right extremists. I do not believe in censoring sources, especially when they are accurate and reliable. Johns (talk) 19:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I left the article link on the main page, but deleted the unnecessary talk page edit. I'm not about to allow whitewashing. Bongolian (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

It's probably just best if I use just this account and no IPs for the future. The only reason I have been using IPs on and off this year is because of various stalkers off-site watching every edit I make. I will just edit from this account from now on. Johns (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll mention another example of something that looks like obvious ban evasion by Smith. An IP user has been updating the Manhattan Institute article with details about Smith's various lawsuits: [8] [9] [10] The only sources for those edits are Smith's posts at Twitter (the archived page cited in the first diff), and obscure court documents about his lawsuits that haven't been discussed anywhere outside of RationalWiki. Smith's lawsuits against Kirkegaard and against Substack do not involve the Manhattan Institute, so they also seem off-topic in an article about that organization.

I have two questions. First @Bongolian Do you agree that these look like further examples of ban evasion by Smith?

Second @Johns Do you argue that those edits actually are from you? Tetrapteryx (talk) 13:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

As I said, this is not ban evasion. All of those edits were mine. The lawsuits are not obscure, they are public documents on CourtListener. I have been following all of the lawsuits. I wrote most of the Cancel Watch section at the Manhattan Institute article last year and linked to public documents. I also spent years uploading Abd Lomax's updates about his lawsuit. I have covered other failed lawsuits including Bryan Pesta's, Malcolm Kendrick's, Zoe Harcombe's and about 10 others. It is all public knowledge. Off-site I have a lot of stalkers so I am not always going to use an account to update these articles. There is no rule that says we cannot use IPs, most users do it.

I am generally curious, are you the owner of CancelWatch? Is that why you are obsessed with Smith and spend your time stalking him everyday. I am not sure what you are doing with your life but it isn't productive. I am active here creating articles. Your MO is just to stir shit and spread misinformation. The users over at Wikipediocracy describe you as an attention seeker. I think you need to come off here and find something better to do. We don't need anymore drama. We have already had to put with with Kirkegaard/Karlin/Abd Lomax's, now you are the next one. Just let us RationalWiki editors edit in peace please! Stop being petty and emailing RationalWiki users, stop leaving messages on user's pages complaining about your article or Smith. Nobody is interested in your drama. Let's be productive! Johns (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

I brought up the ban evasion issue with Bongolian because one of the users commenting in this discussion contacted me privately, complaining about how nobody was enforcing Smith's ban and asking me if I knew of a way to do anything about it. It has nothing to do with Cancel Watch. I also don't particularly care about the issue being discussed there (regarding the Anomaly article), but that user's complaint about ban evasion seemed reasonable to me.

I still don't know how one is supposed to report potential ban evasion without it causing a drama. RationalWiki needs a way for that to be possible, and I had hoped posting unobtrusively in a moderator's user talk would be the way to accomplish it, but trying to do it this way evidently caused a drama also.

I'm becoming more skeptical of your argument that all of these accounts and IPs were yours rather than Smith's, and that you weren't proxy-editing for Smith while using them, but ultimately that isn't my decision to make. It's up to the moderators to determine whether anything improper has been happening, and I've said what I have to say about this. Tetrapteryx (talk) 14:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Jonathan Anomaly/Matthew Archer/Emil Kirkegaard/Edward Dutton/George Francis/Jordan Lasker/Woodley Menie/Anatoly Karlin/Bronze Age Pervert are all racist pricks who will do anything to try and get their articles deleted including sending all kinds of email threats, blackmail or fake money agreements to take their articles down. I am not sure why you side with many of these extremists behind the scenes, they have back-chatted you on discord. You are on the wrong side, wasting your time defending these individuals. Why not use your account to debunk these guys pseudoscience and racist shite? Jordan Lasker for example needs an article as does Jonatan Pallesen. You can get a nice article created for these racist individuals and within a few weeks and it is the top Google search for their name. That puts a nice little smile on my face :)

Emil Kirkegaard wants to legalize cp and enjoys eating dog meat, I am not sure why you go out of your way to defend that guy. A very unethical individual. He doesn't have nice things to say about you. The best thing to do is to keep editing here and debunk these guys. They are not pleasant individuals! Anyone can use an IP here and edit. Let's not get in the way of progress. I feel good about editing here as do many other editors. Kirkegaard and his cult lose! Their pages will never come down. They will probably still be online in 2035. Johns (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

If you want to know the underlying reason for my involvement, you made me and Emily Willoughby care about this set of issues by creating RationalWiki articles about us. (You seem to be saying "Boar" was you, and that account was the creator of the Willoughby article.) It isn't really about defending any of the other people you mentioned. If you were to find a way to get both of our articles deleted, I could make a deal in return to stop participating in RationalWiki, except possibly making anti-creationism edits from time to time. But it would need to be both her article and mine, not just one or the other. And I predict deleting them won't be possible, because RationalWiki's other users won't agree to it. Too bad, but you have to live with the consequences of your decision to create them. Tetrapteryx (talk) 15:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry!

I apologise for reverting some of your edits in the UK general election page, wasn't intentional in the slightest and I apologise --Unfunnyman

No problem. Bongolian (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Christians category

I do think we have a problem on the wiki with articles that have categories for Christians. You said catholic already covers it, but most of the pages have the category Christianity and the branch of Christianity (Catholicism, Protestantism), so it might be a problem to sort out. I think it’s better to just have both instead of removing the other, it’s much easier that way. Rational Dude (talk) 20:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

I think it defeats the purpose of having subcategories to put everyone in Category:Catholics also into Category:Christians. There are 3 other subcategories of Christians currently: Baptists, Mormons and Protestants. If you want to take it up as an issue, you can do so on Category talk:Christians. Bongolian (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

I don’t have a problem with it, I’m just saying it might be an issue for the wiki because a lot of articles have both of these categories. Rational Dude (talk) 23:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It could be cleaned up systematically if someone cared enough. Bongolian (talk) 01:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Should I do it? Rational Dude (talk) 03:59, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@Techpriest might have a way to do this easily with Inferno Bot. Bongolian (talk) 04:49, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

@Bongolian and Rational Dude I can run Inferno Bot to wipe the Christians category of mainspace pages if you want me to? -- Techpriest (talk) 18:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not about wiping it out, but removing the redundancy of for example people being in both the Christians and Catholics categories, when we all know that all Catholics are Christians. It might be more work than it's worth programmatically. Bongolian (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Don’t worry about it, I think it’s best to leave it until we can find a good solution. Rational Dude (talk) 11:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Archiving

Were you the one who asked about archiving Tweets before? It seems like it works for archive.today again, though it still won't capture whole threads. Chillpilled (talk) 13:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I was. Thanks! Bongolian (talk) 15:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Why Are You Blocking Corrections to the "J.D. Vance" Article's Lies?

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:J._D._Vance#Is_J.D._Vance_an_Antisemite.3F PeaRidge62 (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

The new citation you added to the page does not prove J.D. Vance to be "antisemitic." All he's saying is that Jews who really care about Israel should vote for Donald Trump. I disagree with him just as much as I'm sure you do, but that does not make him "antisemitic" in the least. Please look up the actual definition of the word. PeaRidge62 (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

It is standard procedure here that after edit warring, the protection of a page can be changed to prevent further edit warring and the page gets reverted to it pre-edit war state. I changed the protection to last for 3 days. In the meantime, you can still make your case on the talk page that he is not antisemitic or that the citations given are insufficient. Bongolian (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Collapse problem

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Uyghur_genocide

I don't know what I'm doing wrong. Everytime I collapse a piece of text, I end up taking the whole page along. I literally copy-pasted the code from someone else on that page... Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the problem is. The page looks fine as it is now. Some templates conflict with others when nested. Bongolian (talk) 16:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I saw that Geejay already fixed it. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks for giving me my sysop status back. I’ll avoid using the categories of racists and fascists now, I know I sometimes overused them in the past. But I’ll get to editing now and use them wisely. Rational Dude (talk) 17:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome, but it was not just me. It required the vote of the mob. Bongolian (talk) 17:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I know, but you still helped :) Rational Dude (talk) 17:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Two spam accounts just registered

The two spam accounts of KetonaraIngredients‎ and BuyKetozenseACV‎ just registered as RationalWiki editors. Jurisdicta (talk) 18:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Dealt with. But for future reference, you don't need to alert mods of spam accounts, we have enough sysops who will take care of the issue on their own. Plutocow (talk) 18:22, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me?

I've been lurking for a while but this is my only account. I just got tired of cringing after seeing "pwned" linked everywhere, with the last straw being someone adding a link to it back to a page today. Hell, even in the talkpage for the "article", you can see the editors even ten years ago wanted nothing to do with that article and was only moved to funspace because people were too lazy to AfD it. I don't see who I'm being accused of being a return of? Summer1109 (talk) 20:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

There was very similar behavior last night by User:Joe Smith. It is was consequently suspicious that the first edits you made were also for an AfD.[11] Traditionally, there is substantially more leniency about the content of Funspace articles. I've removed you from the vandal bin. Try making a few contributions first before doing the AfD again.[12] Bongolian (talk) 20:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

The problem is it's linked to from many mainspace pages so it's not just a funspace issue. As for the other guy, just because a vandal used AfDs doesn't mean every AfD is vandalism. Vote against the AfD if you wish, but I feel I have presented a legitimate case that deserves to be heard. Summer1109 (talk) 20:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Take out the links then. It's part of RW's history. Scream!! (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

About categories

Am I allowed to add categories for anything not relating to fascism? I have been avoiding using that category on drafts unless I find proper sources that justify the category. Rational Dude (talk) 02:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it's fine to add whatever categories you think appropriate on draft articles as comments or as draft categories. If you want to move it to mainspace at some point, just make sure another editor has reviewed the categories. Thanks. Bongolian (talk) 02:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Am I allowed to add categories to mainspace pages though? Rational Dude (talk) 11:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

You're still under active sanctions for that (RationalWiki:Active sanctions#Topic bans), so no. You would have to win an appeal for that privilege to be restored in the moderator noticeboard (RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation). Bongolian (talk) 14:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Alright. How much longer should I wait until I’m allowed to appeal? Rational Dude (talk) 19:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

There is no set time for how long to wait, but it's been over a year so that seems more than a reasonable length of time. In your appeal, give an explanation for why you think the sanction should be removed, and you might want to cite any draft space pages that would support your case. Bongolian (talk) 19:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Of course, I will. Thank you. Rational Dude (talk) 04:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Vote

Can you please start the vote this time? I tried doing it, but I have no clue how to start it, and I don’t want to make a mess on the page. Rational Dude (talk) 19:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Board nomination

You got one. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 20:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Question

Is it possible to move a deleted draft to a sandbox? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, first restore the draft, then relocate the draft. Bongolian (talk) 23:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

How do you relocate a draft? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 12:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

From the Draftspace page, use the drop-down menu "More" at the top of the page, then select "Relocate". Then select the new domain ("User" in this case, and the new name of the page (something like "Arcadium Trancefer/Sandbox" or "Arcadium Trancefer/newpagename"). Bongolian (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Suharto

Can we remove the page for "Suharto family" and make one focusing on Suharto himself instead? Rational Dude enter thy lair 00:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

It seems to be primarily focused on Suharto himself already, so maybe it could just be renamed. Are you planning to add to the page?

Yeah, I think it's better that it be renamed or moved. May I have permission to? Rational Dude enter thy lair 22:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I don't think it would be controversial. Bongolian (talk) 00:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Rational Dude enter thy lair 21:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I don't really have any powers of permission giving here. Bongolian (talk) 21:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I meant from the community, since you’re one of the few people who answer quickly. Should I hold an atim for it or something? Rational Dude enter thy lair 05:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Cosmikdebris already did the move; maybe he was listening in. You don't have to go to ATIM for things that are likely to be non-controversial. Bongolian (talk) 05:20, 15 August 2024 (UTC) Alright, thanks for the heads up Rational Dude enter thy lair 12:28, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

He...

Right but for wrong reasons *cough cough*. Also interesting *clears throat*. Does JJ's point at the top remind you of anything *blows nose*. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. He wants the page but wants to control the narrative, I guess. Bongolian (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't get it. Looks like time to move on anyway. Chillpilled (talk) 20:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Online WP pages normally hit the top of G-searches and grant a bit of kudos [OldTwitter used to grant blue ticks on the back of them]. The absence of them meant RW was the top instead. Thus the issue. The appearance of our legal Eeyore must simply be the coincidence of the decade. KarmaPolice (talk) 20:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Edit

https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Media_Matters_for_America&diff=prev&oldid=2680019

What's a "pozhole"? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 10:54, 24 September 2024 (UTC)