Hidolo

Welcome!

Hi Hidolo! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! -- Toddy1 (talk) 04:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Bharatiya Janata Party‎

If you want the edit you want implemented, you need:

• to write a draft of the paragraph that includes references with citation templates,
• to write something more substantial than one sentence,
• to say where exactly you want this new paragraph to be put in the article.

That way, you are making it easy for other editors to help you. If you are saying that an experienced editor needs to do 40 minutes work implementing your good idea, you are treating him/her like they are your secretary.-- Toddy1 (talk) 04:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

I want to add the following text in the "ideology and political positions" section. Obviously then in the template:

"The party along the history has been widely described as a right-wing party, but has recently been described as far-right one, specifically is considered part of the radical right, a subset of the far-right that does not oppose democracy." Hidolo (talk) 22:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

References

June 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Liberal Initiative. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 03:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, especially if it involves living persons. Your edits have been reverted. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 23:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

First, what you accuse me of is completely false. Whenever I add information to Wikipedia it is backed by quality sources. I always try to do my best by searching for references from good media or bibliographical articles. In fact, the only thing you did was deny that the references that I had added did not say what the article said, which with three clicks you can verify is false. All the sources I use mention what they refer to. It seems to me that you are not satisfied with either the references or the edits I make that are completely justified with sources. Second, who are you to reverse all my contributions, some with false notes, others not even. It's honestly a shame that Wikipedia editors are so biased. So I will add back all the content that you removed arbitrarily, without any justification. Hidolo (talk) 01:01, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

You added "far-right" here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Free_Voters&oldid=1230016076 where in the source does it call the Free Voters far-right? https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/10/09/germany-s-far-right-afd-party-makes-gains-in-major-setback-for-olaf-scholz-s-sdp_6158832_4.html --FMSky (talk) 02:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

it says "Free Voters is a far-right party whose leader Hubert Aiwanger, number two in the Bavarian government [...]". Hidolo (talk) 03:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

The term Free Voters is not even mentioned in the source https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/10/09/germany-s-far-right-afd-party-makes-gains-in-major-setback-for-olaf-scholz-s-sdp_6158832_4.html --FMSky (talk) 03:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

What you said here is completely irrelevant. Edit warring is bad, whether you have reliable sources or not. Users should find a solution through a consensus rather than constant reverting. Odideum (talk) 13:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Christian Social Union in Bavaria. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. FMSky (talk) 15:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 17:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I know what I did was not right. But the user FMSky did exactly the same thing, and reverted all my edits. Obviously each edit he makes on Wikipedia is done with biases as can be seen here[1] (Where he lies blatantly) or here[2] (Where with the excuse that I had added it to the article, false, he removed crucial content for the article). He is definitely a disruptive user (even though he has been editing Wikipedia for several years). I think he should also have a sanction. Hidolo (talk) 16:19, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Please just stop mass adding right wing and far right to political parties that are more commonly described otherwise --FMSky (talk) 16:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

First, you were lying to reverse what you want. You don't even deny it. You accept that you did it. You did vandalism. It deserves a sanction. Second, I edit whatever I want, as long as I use quality references, which is what I do. If you don't like how the media describes the political parties you like, it's not my problem. Hidolo (talk) 17:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Thats the problem though, your sources arent "quality", often the content you add isnt supported by the source (see the example from above) or is misinterpreted. --FMSky (talk) 17:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Are you talking seriously? Lying again. I quote verbatim where it says exactly that it is a centrist party. "Enrique Alfaro, a member of the centrist opposition party Movimiento Ciudadano (MC)" Hidolo (talk) 17:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I said "often", not "always" --FMSky (talk) 17:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

When? Hidolo (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

You still lying[3]. Hidolo (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

See, this is where you're wrong. First, you were the one to change positions for some really big parties, so you should've opened a consensus there. Second, your sources were rarely "quality". Just because you found a source that supports your claim, it doesn't mean it's quality whatsover. Third, @FMSky does not deserve a sanction since he hasn't been warned multiple times to stop edit-warring like you did. Politics on Wikipedia are already highly heated, so your constant reverting does not help. You're welcome to edit if you're willing to follow the rules. Odideum (talk) 17:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Who are you? And Why you only comment opposed me? I think you are a socketpuppet of FMSky. Hidolo (talk) 17:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Because you're wrong. I'm not an administrator, so I rarely deal with vandalism, however when you revert my edits, it concerns me. No, I'm not a sockpuppet if you're wondering, you'll need better proof for that claim. Odideum (talk) 17:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

You revert, like him, every edit that I realize. Hidolo (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Maybe there's a problem with your edits then -- FMSky (talk) 17:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

This is so strange. Hidolo (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Because your edits often don't have good sources to back up your claims. Odideum (talk) 17:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Please can you verify something? Hidolo (talk) 17:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Republican Study Committee, you may be blocked from editing. Toa Nidhiki05 14:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for continued WP:BATTLEGROUND behaviour and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Values Union. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. FMSky (talk) 00:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

New sock

Hi @HJ Mitchell: thanks for blocking Hidolo. However a new sock has appeared https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Locoporlavida It seems to have been registered while the old account was temporarily blocked. Same types of edits, meaning political positions only, mobile only, same mass addition of google books sources 1, 2--FMSky (talk) 17:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Could be. However, that account was created way before he got banned, and before this one. The admins should definitely look further into this considering his edits (and the topics he edits on) are very similar to Hidolo's ones Odideum (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Odideum: actually, i just noticed that the acc is already blocked on the spanish wiki as a sock of somebody https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribuciones/Locoporlavida -FMSky (talk) 16:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I also found something interesting. On the Spanish wiki, when you type 'Usuario: Hidolo' it says the account is blocked for being a sockpuppet of "LokitaLokita." So it could be that he was banned before. Odideum (talk) 20:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

What a coincidence, that account is also a puppet of LokitaLokita (who is banned on the Spanish wiki), he and his sockpuppets needs to be banned globally. Odideum (talk) 20:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Could you block the account? It should be clear its a sock --FMSky (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)