In reply to your request for diffs[1] related to my "multiple salvos" remark, you've made four comments in the RSN thread about Rep Thompson and talk about the word "coup". In those you named several people and said they said something and maybe they did or maybe that's your characterization after the passage of years. Unless you provide sources, how can one know, unless they possess extensive prior knowledge about it all? That's all I meant,and I think I've answered your request for diffs. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What you are saying is laughably false. As said above please take your harassment elsewhere. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am no fan of the editors Specifico and Zaathras. I have had issues with them and I don't consider their demeanor specially great. Some editors simply don't recognize when they are wrong and don't back away from mistakes or uncivil behavior, even if relevant policies or guidelines are pointed at them. Thinker78 (talk) 16:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC) 00:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you self-revert this. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The frustrating part for me is that SPECIFICO has been warned at least 14 times for such behavior, but it continues. Maybe you could send some advice their way? Mr Ernie (talk) 00:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you again, by the way. Hope everything is well. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Herculean Award
	Keeping POV warriors at bay is like decapitating the lernaean Hydra, thinking it will go away.
	Heracles cried out, and the Hydra pushed back. Where there was once one head, two more appeared. And then a giant crab came to assist the Hydra.
	The 12 Labors of Heracles Atsme 💬 📧 01:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry @Atsme, just getting around to responding to this. It does seem like an unwinnable task, at times! Mr Ernie (talk) 15:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Arbitration Committee is considering an unban appeal from Lightbreather (talk · contribs). You are being notified as you participated in the last unban discussion. You may give feedback here. For the Arbitration Committee, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:29, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there - I just read your comment over on this talk page discussion. Since I'm new around here, would you mind explaining to me: what are the differences/reasons to include a reference in an "External Links" section vs. adding it as an inline citation in the article? Functionally, they seem pretty much the same to me. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 21:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The external link policy is WP:EL. I find this point to be the most relevant - "Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources." Seems to be a textbook definition for linking to the NYPost piece. The reason why it can't be linked as an inline citation gets a bit muddy. The short answer is that NYPost is not considered a reliable source for factual reporting, but it is a little odd because the Post certainly ran the story and certainly made claims about Hunter Biden. Mr Ernie (talk) 12:50, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see your reasoning on that quoted point. Though, this particular case seems to exist in the overlap between WP:EL and the many exceptional cases to WP:RS criteria. It seems that while the criteria for classifying a source as "reliable" are pretty straightforward - "independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" - there are a LOT of exceptions to these, documented in various guidelines and essays. I've found 2 or 3 such exceptions that apply to the source in question that I think would allow it to be used as an inline citation.

It's not immediately clear to me how to resolve a gray area like this... Ask for opinions from other editors, and see what gets consensus, I guess? PhotogenicScientist (talk) 14:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, and I don't have any problem with the story cited in the body and/or external links. For some reason though there are editors at that page who are determined that we don't link it anywhere for some reason. It's a disservice to readers. Mr Ernie (talk) 14:10, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. ––FormalDude (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]