User talk:Bluetik

Welcome!

Hello, Bluetik, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

– Fayenatic London 11:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Fayenatic! Already having fun learning/editing here. Bluetik (talk) 08:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Studies of right-wing politics

Category:Studies of right-wing politics has been nominated for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_5#Category:Studies_of_right-wing_politics. – Fayenatic London 11:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies has been accepted

Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~ lovkal (talk) 12:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Bluetik (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 193.108.243.248. Tried to appeal by the UTRS system but ran into a confusion there. I don’t believe this block was necessary, because I have never (to my knowledge) had any conduct issues; and the block appears to be a part of a blanket ban on an IP range - this IP was possibly previously an open proxy, but it is not now

Decline reason:

You are not currently using that IP address; you've been able to edit outside of this page. That IP address belongs to HostRoyale Technologies. Yamla (talk) 23:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hello @ Yamla , I am only able to edit through my phone, which is very difficult and limiting Bluetik (talk) 11:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Bluetik. Thank you for your work on Man’s World (publication). Another editor, JSFarman, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Wow. Thanks for writing the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|JSFarman}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

JSFarman (talk) 18:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. If you have any recommendations to do this as well as possible please let me know. I do have one question but I should probably do that on the article’s talk page Bluetik (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. If the questions is related to Man's World you should ask it on the talk page. Otherwise I am happy to help if I can. Happy editing; glad you are here! JSFarman (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, 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 special powers 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 practice;
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.

Generalrelative (talk) 18:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you were unaware of the consensus of race and intelligence, but regardless, this edit summary was clearly deceptive. You mentioned the less controversial part of the edit and failed to note that you were altering the statement on the scientific consensus. Generalrelative (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am actually at least somewhat familiar, I was trying to use more careful language given the genetic range restriction of intelligence - I’m happy to break edits into separate parts though. I’ll wait until reading all the policies and background before proceeding on contentious topics as well. Definitely not trying to deceive and I appreciate the flexibility and link to the discussion Bluetik (talk) 22:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to be totally clear since here and in your note (link) it seems like you might be asserting I was deliberately obscuring or misleading with my edit note - I don’t want to be unnecessarily combative but to avoid any confusion, no I was using a note that explained what seemed most necessary to explain (changing a fact versus softening grammar to be cautious) Bluetik (talk) 23:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]