User talk:Tinterest

I haven'Tinterest

Your GA nomination of Geodesy

The article Geodesy you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Geodesy for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TompaDompa -- TompaDompa (talk) 06:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Geodesy

Please do not mess around with the article history by putting some of it in the archives. It needs to stay on the main talk page. Time on that article would better be spent improving the sourcing to bring it up to the required standards. You should read Wikipedia:Verifiability at your earliest convenience - it's one of the core pillars of editing WP, so is fairly fundamental to anything done here. - SchroCat (talk) 09:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to climate change, 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.

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your unsolicited mail. So why not just delete such contentious articles, instead of leaving them linger forever unresolved? What good are they, given that they forever deepen divisions in a society? Tinterest (talk) 00:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was a kind request to start focusing on content, not on editors, and to make you aware that uninvolved admins have more leeway to deal with conduct in contentious areas. For instance by imposing a topic ban.

I don't really understand where you're coming from, given you spend so much time attacking everyone. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]