User talk:TylerBurden

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 1.5 days may be auto-archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 5.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

WP:ONUS explanation

ONUS does not give you a license to remove anything you don't like and edit war to preserve the removal. I discussed this matter with an administrator (SFR) where he clearly indicated that disputed longstanding content requires consensus to remove. While there are some extreme exceptions (like BLP articles and vandalism), for usual content disputes this is considered battleground editing.

You have been warned by an administrator (ToBeFree) for identical conduct in the past. Lawyering your way to avoid discussion is not appropriate for a CTOP. Please discuss the matter on the talk page instead of edit warring. JDiala (talk) 23:32, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa. I screwed up here and reverted my own edits on the Nord Stream thing. The addition of the Nord Stream material was recent and not longstanding. My apologies. I am nevertheless curious about your perspectives on ONUS as applied to longstanding content. You've dealt with a similar case with WeatherWriter linked above, and the two of us have had several editing disputes over the last year; clarification regarding this point can avoid problems down the road.

Do you agree with the basic principle that, barring exceptional cases (vandalism or a BLP-violation), disputes involving the removal of longstanding content should require discussion-page consensus? This is the view expressed by admin SFR in the linked discussion above, as well as admin ToBeFree in a past discussion on your talk page. JDiala (talk) 01:12, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how that is relevant here, since we're not talking about long-standing content, but content inserted days before into the article, but yes I can agree with actual good faith long-standing article content being an exception to WP:ONUS. I'm not removing things "I don't like", I'm trying to abide by pretty basic Wikipedia policy, and creating an energy infrastructure section in an article about the Russian invasion of Ukraine and making it mostly about Ukrainian attacks on Russia or Ukrainians being arrested for sabotage is not following WP:NPOV. TylerBurden (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with JDiala. TylerBurden also did this to me, but I am not going to restore my revision, even though I should and his conduct is not allowed. Cyrobyte (talk) 16:11, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was generally understood by editors with years of experience how WP:ONUS works, especially if they involve themselves in contentious topics, but here we have two examples that seems to point to the contrary. TylerBurden (talk) 17:48, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian nationalism

I didn't add any of mine "own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles" just add template to the topic it is link at this template Bildete (talk) 20:11, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bildete You literally changed the short description of Far-right politics in Ukraine to "Ukrainian nationalism", either you have no idea how short descriptions work, or you're labelling all Ukrainian nationalism as far-right. TylerBurden (talk) 18:29, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

You have recently made edits related to discussions about infoboxes, and edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. This is a standard message to inform you that discussions about infoboxes, and edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. —Fortuna, imperatrix 16:02, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Cyrobyte (talk) 16:08, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know you liked one of my edits on Russia

Since you liked one of my edits on Russia, I thought you might be interested in the information below.

I did some preliminary research and come up with this:

• How can Wikipedia's Vladimir Putin article be improved so it has more reach?, ChatGPT

• How can Wikipedia's Vladimir Putin article be improved so it has more reach?, Grok

Refined query:

• How can Wikipedia's Vladimir Putin article be improved so it has more reach? Estimate the extra visitors per month to the article and the percentage increase in visitors if the recommendations were implemented, ChatGPT

• How can Wikipedia's Vladimir Putin article be improved so it has more reach? Estimate the extra visitors per month to the article and the percentage increase in visitors if the recommendations were implemented., Grok

Both Grok and ChatGPT can be used to improve articles and to expand their reach as they give actionable advice.

I hope you found the information helpful. Knox490 (talk) 22:19, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]