Bonmot

Welcome Bonmot!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 47,448,873 registered editors!

Hello Bonmot. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!

I'm Pdebee, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:   Introduction to Wikipedia   The five pillars of Wikipedia   Editing tutorial   How to edit a page   Simplified Manual of Style   The basics of Wikicode   How to develop an article   How to create an article   Help pages   What Wikipedia is not

Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:   Do be bold   Do assume good faith   Do be civil   Do keep cool!   Do maintain a neutral point of view   Don't spam   Don't infringe copyright   Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest   Don't commit vandalism   Don't get blocked

If you need further help, you can:   Ask a question

or you can:   Get help at the Teahouse

or even:   Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:   Fight vandalism   Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome   Help contribute to articles   Perform maintenance tasks

Become a member of a project that interests you   Help design new templates   Subscribe and contribute to The Signpost

To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your userpage.

Please remember to:

• Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
• Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
  

The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!

Sincerely, Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(guestbook)} 12:16, 9 September 2019 (UTC)   (Leave me a message)

• Español
• Deutsch
• Français
• Italiano
• עברית
• Русский
• 日本語
• Polski
• فارسی

April 2020

Hello, Bonmot. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page SurVision Magazine, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 14:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

• I don't appreciate unfounded assumptions, nor do I like personal attacks. I don't promote anything, and I don't have a connection with the subject. I am a Wiki editor just like you. Please refrain from mutilating articles if you have an issue with a particular institution that they describe. This is not nice, to put it mildly. And this is also personal interest from your part. --Bonmot (talk) 15:50, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Bonmot. It looks like you are engaging in edit warring at SurVision Magazine, trying to add content referenced to the magazine itself. Wikipedia articles should be written based primarily on what reliable sources independent of the topic say about the topic. This article is based largely on an interview with the founder (not independent) and a reference to the magazine itself (not independent). Therefore, I ask you to self-revert, to discuss the matter on the article talk page, and to avoid referencing the magazine itself when trying to expand the article. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:45, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated. You are right, referencing the website wasn't such a great idea. I've provided the link to The Irish News, instead; it is our national newspaper; this is surely a better reference for this material.--Bonmot (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

You are correct that at least that source is independent, so thank you. But that article only mentions SurVision in passing, so is of no value in establishing the notability of the magazine. For that, we really need significant coverage of the magazine in reliable sources that are independent of the magazine. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)But instead.....you go right back to jerking the article around with unsourced information. Stop editing....start talking. Please....this is how Wikipedia works. I'm sorry you aren't understanding that. Additionally, you do need to address the questions above regarding your connection to the magazine. Are you published there? Do you work for them, hold a financial interest in the company or contract to it for a service? Jim? I'm off to do something outside with my boy. Enjoy your Sunday, Jim...and your Monday, Bonmot. John from Idegon (talk) 18:14, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Having no connection to SurVision Books, I can only guess that you have submitted to that poetry press and were turned down; this could explain your personal vendetta against it. As for me, I am not even a poet, even though I scribbled a bit when I was young; I am a designer, and I don't work for a particular press, including this one. By now, I have provided enough reliable sources for you to stop making very suspicious edits to this article, so you can relax and enjoy life, if you can. --Bonmot (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

"Personal vendetta", Bonmot? That is way out of line. John from Idegon is trying to maintain our policies and guidelines. Your speculations and accusations and innuendo to the contrary are not acceptable. Read and study WP:AGF. Stop this behavior now so that it will not be necessary to block you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:46, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Bonmot. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Wow. Just wow

This is completely uncalled for...and gee, you still haven't answered the question. John from Idegon (talk) 18:33, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

You have been blocked for 31 hours from editing for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You continued your personal attacks after I warned you to stop. That is unacceptable behavior. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks but no thanks for ganging up on me. Personal attack was first launched against me, I was accused of being paid by the press my article is about, for no reason at all, this is harassment but it is ok by you: I don't know you and I don't call you Jim, like the other party who clearly does know you. So much for fairness and human decency. Make no mistake, I will be back, and I will find Wiki editors who like Irish culture as much as I do and who will help me to stand up against the haters.--Bonmot (talk) 20:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Also, I challenge you not to take part in any further discussions relating to the article in question. If you are an unbiased editor, as you claim you are, you will do that and let other editors have their say.--Bonmot (talk) 20:46, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I will participate in any discussion that I choose to participate in, and I will comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines when I do so. I am unbiased because all I want is for the article to comply with the notability guideline. As for calling me "Jim", I openly invite other editors to do so on my userpage, so that is not unusual. I have interacted with John from Idegon in the past because we are both long term, highly active editors. Not at all unusual. As a matter of fact, the last time we interacted, I was critical of some aspects of his behavior. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:40, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

As for your assertion that John from Idegon engaged in a personal attack against you, that is false. The language he left above on your talk page is a standard template with standard language widely used throughout the project for inquiries about conflict of interest. So, no administrator will agree with your assessment of that message. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:45, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

• This is your edit analysis. As you can see, nearly a third of your edits have been to the article at hand. That, coupled with your emotional reaction to being asked about it (using the standard template for doing so), is pretty clear evidence of some sort of tie to the subject of the article. I'd strongly suggest your first edit after unblock be to deny it unambiguously or open a thread at WP:COIN about it. A level 3 paid warning follows, which is also appropriate, as you've continued to deflect rather than answer the question. In case you don't understand, there isn't a manager here. You are answerable to the community, of which I am part. Your choices are above, and I'd strongly suggest any admin drifting by here move to enforce our WP:PAID policy if you make a different choice. John from Idegon (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

You still have not responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying you may be blocked from editing. John from Idegon (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you should stop being offensive, Mr. Holier-Than-Thou. You shouldn't harass other editors as per WP:HAR. Small presses, let alone online poetry magazines, have no paid editors; anybody who knows anything about publishing will tell you that. I hope this is an honest mistake and not something more sinister. You said you had no interest in poetry, so what, if not a personal vendetta, is floating your boat? Why this crusade against this particular publisher? You never objected against having articles about occasional poetry publishers, but you attack this one, even though it is a prolific one that publishes important poets, simply because their field is surrealist poetry. Is this the reason? I guess you should familiarize yourself with the guidelines on bias. WP:FIXBIAS.--Bonmot (talk) 21:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

New message from Northamerica1000

Hello, Bonmot. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 00:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

I blocked you for 31 hours for personal attacks and harassment. When your block expired, you returned to the same behavior, right here on this page. That was not a good idea. So, I have now blocked you for 72 hours. If you resume this behavior again, the next block will be for a substantially longer period of time. If you would like to appeal your block, please follow the directions I left above at the time of my first block. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:12, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

block was not necessary to prevent damage or disruption + unfair: it is I who was being harassed.Bonmot (talk) 07:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Even if that is true, fighting fire with fire is not acceptable. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

---

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.

User Cullen³²⁸ got the wrong end of the stick. He didn't seem to notice that I was at the end of a personal attack from User:John from Idegon, who keeps harassing me, accusing me of being paid by the subjects of the articles I edit, etc. etc. If I reply to these ridiculous accusations, I get blocked. I didn't damage or disrupt anything, I keep creating and editing articles in good faith; just check the list of my contributions. This is an arbitrary block, which is also unfair and unjust, therefore I ask the community to interfere and help unblock my account.--Bonmot (talk) 07:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Dedalus Press (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gerry Murphy

Lapwing Publications (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Michael Fanning

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dedalus Press, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gerry Murphy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

List of Indigenous peoples

I have reverted your edits at List of Indigenous peoples‎. First, please read WP:ARBECR. Second, your 'clarity' edit appeared to reduce rather than increase clarity because you removed information about who disputed the claims. Lastly the statement in your edit summary "This was not substantiated by the source and seems like a guess, so rm." is false. The source cited says "The heart of the paper provides a rebuttal of several arguments made by a group of scholars associated with the Israeli state". Your edit summary indicates that you looked at the source cited, but your edit summary suggests that you did not. What is the cause of this inconsistency? Sean.hoyland (talk) 08:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)