Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:34, 23 January 2022

Island Pelican, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Island Pelican! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Misplaced Pages and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Your edits on Sexual Objectification

Greetings. I rolled back your edits on Sexual Objectification because they were cited arguments. One of your edit summaries stated that "many would disagree with this", well, either add those disagreements to the article with citations, or make an argument on the Talk page why the arguments/sources are invalid. I think the article needs a great deal of work, and it is worded very strangely, and it may have a significant amount of bias in it, but deleting sourced material is probably not the best way to make it better. StarHOG (Talk) 00:36, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Crossroads 07:43, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Liberalism in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Progressive. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Message Accidentally Left on user page by another user

It looks like User:104dragon (talk) attempted to leave you a talk page message and somehow created your user page instead. I'm copying it here and tagging your userpage for deletion since it appears you've never created it. SpinningCeres 19:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
While what the left wing of the party is calling for is consistent with social democracy, they have never used that term and that term is not really used in American politics, so since it is not in circulation it should not be used even if it is consistent with a dictionary definition. What they are calling is consistent with the reformist wing of democratic socialism. Many in the European left like Unidas Podemos or the left-wing of the Labour Party embrace the term democratic socialism to distance themselves from the third way politics that many social democrats have embraced since the eighties.