THC Science

Please don't bite[edit]

Please don't bite the newbies. Although the new user was overeager in his edits at Capitalism, that was being handled adequately by various editors at the article. Regarding your placement of a uw-3rr template in this edit, there was no actual 3rr violation at the article. If there had been, it would have been kinder to explain it in plain English, rather than in a template. Discussions at the User's talk page before your template was added, found him to be perfectly agreeable to guidance and suggestions; even thankful. One last point: this template should always be substed; see Template:Uw-3rr/doc. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 08:09, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

The new editor added material,[1] which was reverted, then re-added it 4 times in 24 hours,[2][3][4][5] despite being reverted each time by different editors. That's a violation. But of course If you don't like how the template is worded, then get it changed. The point of templates is that you use them for new editors, per Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars: "These templates serve to explain the various policies to new editors. When novice editors breach policies, it is quite possible (if we assume good faith, which we must) that they are unaware of them, and educating them is helpful." (It's an essay, but widely followed.) I find it unusual anyway that a new editor would engage in edit-warring in their first edits. TFD (talk) 14:42, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Edit conflict?[edit]

Hey, TFD. I see you replied to IP 99.203.29.17 at Talk:Ilhan Omar after (?) I had already removed its post because the IP is obviously the same person as the already blocked and extremely abusive 99.203.142.213. As you can see, our timestamps are the same, but mine is listed as the first in the history. Not sure what you'd like to do about your reply. If you want to restore the post you replied to, I have no great objection, since that post wasn't as abusive. I'd just as soon not give that person an outlet on Wikipedia, though. Regards, Bishonen | talk 10:49, 21 November 2019 (UTC).

PS, I see they created an account, how charming. Making legal threats was actually the least of the problems; most of the nasty edits were blocked by the edit filter. Bishonen | talk 20:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC).

Help with a recent entry on a BLP[edit]

Hi there, I've always been so impressed with your knowledge of political matters, good intellect and just plain good common sense that I'm wondering if you would take a look at the Racial views of Donald Trump article talk where I just moved an article from the main page to the talk page for discussion. I know what this editor was getting at and I agree but IMO the entry reads like an essay rather than an encyclopedia entry for a BLP. If you are interested, please see what you think. Thanks. Gandydancer (talk) 16:58, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Casting aspersions[edit]

Seriously, what is this:

"Sanders and his policies present a threat to the U.S. in your opinion and the role of the media and Wikipedia editors is to prevent him from becoming president."[6]

A few weeks ago, you accused me of running interference for the dictatorships of Saudi-Arabaia and Jordan: "BTW, why don't you ask us to refer to the kings of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc., that you view favorably as dictators?"[7]

In August 2019, you spitballed conspiracy theories that I was part of a secret cabal of Wikipedia editors and cited some wacko who was appearing on "False Flag Radio" (hosted by a Holocaust-denying 9/11 Truther).[8]

Stop casting aspersions. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 03:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

As is clear from the link you provide I cited the source's comments on Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges' show and the source's web postings, not "False Flag Radio" and when you replied that she had appeared on that show, I immediately replied, "I didn't realize that she co-hosted that show and note she that she did not do so when she appeared on RT or wrote her articles."

On your user page at Some of my endorsements, you list numerous examples from many editors observing that in their opinion your editing consistently shows support of various politicians and corporations and consistently attacks other politicians and organizations.

TFD (talk) 11:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Social democracy (economic theory)[edit]

Hi, what would you think of a Social democracy (economic theory) article that is specifically about the paradigm developed by socialists and implemented by parties across the political spectrum in Western Europe and the United States following the Second World War, replacing neo-classical liberalism, although not only [...] the policies of socialist parties between 1945 and 1975 or 1980, but also [...] the policies pursued by conservative, liberal and Christian democratic parties in the same period as well as Bismark's State Socialism and the economic theory of the modern welfare state? We could discuss the differences and reasons for its adoption such as the Swedish Socialist Democrats, who thought that if people were healthy, well-educated and had a decent standard of living, that they would seek to develop a socialist society. They did not consider the welfare state to be socialism but a necessary condition for its development; and non-socialists who adopted it for ethical or moral reasons, fear of the socialist revolutionary wave in the 1910s–1920s and the Communist threat represented by the Soviet Union, or both. Social democracy (disambiguation) would serve as disambiguation.--Davide King (talk) 03:10, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

talk, I would like to see a source that defines and names the topic first. Social Democrats were not the only drivers of the paradigm btw. There was social liberalism in the UK, ordoliberalism in Germany, dirigisme in France and the New Deal in the U.S. I think it is better known in academic sources as the social liberal paradigm. Obviously Bismarck's state socialism was a precursor and should be mentioned. TFD (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Sourcing isn't my best, so I hoped you could help with that. Oh, I know about all that, but it was my understanding that they were all influenced by social democracy, especially Bismarck's State Socialism. I don't know about you, but I couldn't find anything for the social liberal paradigm, or maybe I didn't search well (hence why my problem with sourcing). I think it would describe the economic theory of the welfare state and of social welfare as adopted in the late 19th century and in the 20th century; one could say social liberals are political liberals and economic social democrats (in this social democratic economic sense, not in the socialist sense of an evolution from capitalism to socialism). I would also really appreciate if you could expand and improve Economic liberalism.--Davide King (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't know of any in depth sources. Bismarck may have been influenced by Ferdinand Lassalle, but he never provided any ideological justification for the welfare state. It is probable that it developed in different places with different ideological justifications. But I haven't seen any comparative studies. It seems that the welfare state was inevitable once society became urbanized, hence different justifications were used, depending on the political identity of whoever implemented it. TFD (talk) 11:00, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

It seems that the welfare state was inevitable once society became urbanized, that's true and I think that's why social liberalism was the natural evolution of this development and not necessarely a deviation from classical liberalism or any liberal principle, really. Anyway, I think we kind of already have an article about this, it's called Social corporatism. Do you think you could improve it and expand on that?--Davide King (talk) 19:12, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

THC Science

Bringing Science to the Cannabis Conversation!

Cannabis Sativa

Contents