User talk:FavourNSpice
Welcome!
[edit]Hi FavourNSpice! I noticed your contributions to Effective altruism and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! Bluethricecreamman (talk) 02:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Effective altruism
[edit]I have reverted your edits to Effective altruism a second time. Please do not restore you preferred version a third time until you have consensus. The article's talk page is the place to form this consensus. To briefly address these issue here, for convenience, any examples, such as the names of schools should be summarized by reliable, independent sources as examples. Please do not add [[WP:OR]|original research]]. Avoid vague language and loaded such as "prestigious", "significant", "major", etc. Further, blog posts from involved organizations are rarely reliable at all, and especially not for the lead. Favor reliable and independent sources. Again, the article's talk page would be a better place to discuss these changes. Grayfell (talk) 05:23, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- They're given in The Washington Post article. The "elite" wording is used in almost any source I can find about the movement online. That isn't a compliment. In fact, Effective Altruism has been widely criticized for appealing exclusively to students in elite universities (whether flagships or Ivy-type schools). I think it's completely understandable to list major organizations connected to EA and I specifically cited a book that listed them. FavourNSpice (talk) 05:29, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- I responded on the article's talk page so we can discuss this. FavourNSpice (talk) 05:38, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
-bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 02:39, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.