User talk:Helper201

Note - I briefly set up the account User:Helper201V2 when I was having trouble logging into this account. That account only ever engaged in talk about my account and never made any edits. I did not make any edits to any pages with it and will not use it to make any edits unless otherwise stated. This is the one and only account I use.

Welcome!

Hello, Helper201! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 19:17, 5 March 2015 (UTC) Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Pirate Party UK

Hello. The accounts submitted to the EC actually have this membership figure on them. There used to be a citation on the page showing this but it has since been removed - apparently the citation isn't open to the general public yet, but it should be shortly (it's actually over-due but the snap general election has slowed down the electoral commission some what). It's a bit of a waste of time to edit the graph only to change it back in a week or two - especially when I know the information to be valid.

No body

The mention of the body does not say that she is dead. But it does connect to her late father’s wish to give her a proper Christian burial. If you are willing to accept that, pls undo previous edit. If not, pls mention in the Talk.

Thank you dear for updating Awami league page back to original

Dear, I have noticed that you edited Awami League page back to original one and I'm delighted that you have done that. Unfortunately, users like Vif12vf|,Nzs9|, and ShrewMoon| take down good edits. I strongly advice you to monitor, Awami League page. It is being vandalized by users that are putting on false information and arguing about topics that they do not understand.2607:FEA8:A75B:7100:5A4:16B3:2839:64DB (talk) 18:47 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Please stop Nzs9 from editing

Nzs9|, is keeping on editing on Awami league page. He does it and then even has it undone. I would advice to monitor him and report him so he gets a ban from editing on Awami league page.2607:FEA8:A75B:7100:5A4:16B3:2839:64DB (talk) 14:27 20 March 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:A75B:7100:D4B6:874C:1C1F:7A6 (talk)

Reverting images on Far-left politics

I am fine with the reversions. But what is more left than communism and anarchism? That's as far left as you can get.

Maybe there is an ideology Im not aware of.

Nashhinton (talk) 17:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Nashhinton it’s just because the matter has received a lot of back and forth editing and edit waring, hence the extensive talk page discussion on the matter. When matters are contested such as this it’s best to wait until a consensus is formed on the matter. The please for this is on the article's talk page. All the best. Helper201 (talk) 18:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

EPP political alignment

Hi @Helper201, point taken for SYNTH for the EPP's political alignment. However, I still think this is notably misleading because many of the EPP's own parties are clearly right-wing and the description of the EPP as "centre-right" is a mix of historical continuation and distinction with the ECR, which is actually more "hard right" then just right-wing. Now, given the weight of national parties within European parties, how about a mention of factions, under "center-right", indicating that they range from centre-right to right-wing? Julius Schwarz (talk) 17:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz we'd need reliable sources to explicitly state that factions of it range between these, otherwise its WP:SYNTH] and WP:OR. Helper201 (talk) 20:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

How do you mean? Here, factions are the national member parties. Many of these parties are already listed as right-wing. If we stick to the fact that the EPP is "centre-right" (which I personally dispute, but that's another matter), but indicate that its factions range from centre-right to right-wing, then the fact that the member parties themselves are already noted to be right-wing should suffice, no? I understand the point of SYNTH, but this is a case where we know what the factions are and what their political alignment is. Julius Schwarz (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz, basically we need a source that says the EPP is right-wing and/or that it has right-wing factions. To use the sources listed on each of the individual parties’ pages to imply a position of the EPP would fall under SYNTH. Helper201 (talk) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Except this is not to imply a position of the EPP but to clarify that there is a diversity among its members. Julius Schwarz (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz, we still need a source that says it has a right-wing faction or right-wing factions. Helper201 (talk) 18:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I still don't get how that's different from the sources saying what political orientation the member parties have. Julius Schwarz (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz, I'd suggest reading what is stated here - WP:SYNTH. We'd be implying a conclusion of how the EPP group is based off of what's cited for its individual members, which falls under synth. I'm not sure if I can expand anymore beyond what I've already said. Helper201 (talk) 19:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I have read that and I still disagree with your conclusion. You assume that indicating the orientation of factions is implying a conclusion on the party itself. I (along with many others, since this system is found on many pages) think the description of factions provides a fuller picture of the orientation of the party: the EPP is center-right, but it contains factions that go from centre-right to right-wing. And that last part is not SYNTH because it's not an assumption on the party itself. The narrow implementation of this policy, in this case, is detrimental to the quality of the article. Julius Schwarz (talk) 20:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz, the best way to attempt to move on from such an impasse is to seek a consensus on the article's talk page. Helper201 (talk) 21:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Julius Schwarz (talk) 04:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Reverted edit on Renaissance

Hi @Helper201, just wanted to ask about your revert of my edit. My reason for removing "centre-right" from the footnote was because I placed "centre-right" in the main position spot. Just wanted to check: did your revert reasoning take that into account? If so, would you support removing "centre-right" from the footnote if the main position was changed to "centre to centre-right", as consensus seems to support on the article's talk page? If not: would you allow me to restore my revision without reverting it again (so as not to start an edit war)? Thanks in advance. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 11:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

GlowstoneUnknown, sorry, I didn't take that into account. I can't see any problem with changing it back if you want to. My apologies. Helper201 (talk) 12:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Ideology of ESN

Hi @Helper201, Just saw you removed Sovereigntism from the ideology of the ESN. My reason for including it was the following line from their political programme: "The ESN party protects the traditional family as the core of a Europe of free peoples founded on identity and sovereignty." Does that not suffice as a source for this ideology? Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Julius Schwarz. That definition seems to contrast with the one given on the Wikipedia page and the quote possibly falls foul of WP:SYNTH, in so far as not specifically stating that it has a sovereigntist ideology. It's also a first-party source, which aren't exactly great for supporting claims (third-party sources are far superior). Helper201 (talk) 14:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. How is it different from the one given on the page though? As far as I can see this is just the English translation and the German version (from the PDF) is provided below, no? I get your point about sources, but it seems like every discussion focuses instead on the political group and not on the party. And, even though they have the same membership, someone will always flag this as the wrong type of source. Short of that, this page might be our (current) best way to support claims for ideology. Do you have anything more reliable? Julius Schwarz (talk) 15:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz, I'm not sure I understand some of your questions within the current context. Basically, we should just keep to what can be explicitly supported by reliable third-party sources. It’s better to have less information than information that is of poor source quality or ambiguous or debatable in nature. Helper201 (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

But given the membership of the party, the ideology of the group (with the same members), and the ideology indicated by the party itself, you really think this is not properly supported? To me, the website, although first-party, is sufficient - it is just well supported by the rest. Julius Schwarz (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Julius Schwarz, it depends what is meant by them by the term "sovereigntist" and whether it aligns with the standard definitions of the term. There are parties for example like the Social Democratic Party (Portugal), that while having social democratic in its name, do not actually advocate for the ideology of social democracy. Sovereigntism is also not something which is cited as an ideology of the parties that make the group. It’s also unclear how many of them really want to enact sovereigntism in so far as aspects such as actually leaving the EU (many Eurosceptic parties in recent years have retracted explicitly stating that they want to leave the EU). Of course, such matters are debatable and it’s not something for which Wikipedia users should ultimately making judgement calls about. Instead, we should only defer to what reliably third-party sources explicitly state. Helper201 (talk) 15:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I didn't really mean that they had "sovereign" in their name, as much as the idea is clearly spelled out in their political programme. And, in my view at least, sovereignty need not mean "leaving the EU", it can just be a focus on the national sovereignty of the member states and the refusal to endow the EU with further competence (and, very often, reduce them). But I guess that's the point: that's my view and it shouldn't be up to us, so let's indeed leave this to third-party sources. Julius Schwarz (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Remove Socialism and Anti-capitalism

Remove Socialism and Anti-capitalism in CPI(M). Communism and Marxism-Leninism itself represents socialism and anti-capitalism. No need to mention it seperately. Add Left-wing to far-left there. It's more radical left of Communist Party of India which is cited as left-wing to far-left. Commie Eagle (talk) 16:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

We go with what reliable sources explicitly state. Helper201 (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Anti-capitalism and Socialist wasn't there earlier. Someone added it. No reference proofs it. Commie Eagle (talk) 16:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Helper201 See here 1964 split in the Communist Party of India#Factions and nomenclature. You will get the sources. Commie Eagle (talk) 16:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

September 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Japanese Communist Party. 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. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)