W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: Alexgt2007

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.


Welcome!



Hi Alexgt2007! 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:

{{Clickable button|Help:Introduction|Learn more about editing|class=mw-ui-progressive|style=margin-left: 1.6em;}}

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:

{{Clickable button|Wikipedia:Teahouse|Get help at the Teahouse|style=margin-left: 1.6em;}}

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

{{Clickable button|Wikipedia:Task Center|Volunteer at the Task Center|style=margin-left: 1.6em;}}

Happy editing! <!-- Template:Welcome--> Mellk (talk) 23:16, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

References



Please always add references when you add somthing, especially if it is controversial such as terrorism-related topics. Sjö (talk) 10:04, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

December 2025



25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Sjö. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source ↗. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable ↗. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation ↗, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-unsourced1 --> Sjö (talk) 23:58, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Accounts


Please note that you can use the same account on your computer and on your phone, since you said that you will commit to using one account. Sjö (talk) 07:40, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

:This is the one I'll use from now on Alexgt2007 (talk) 16:42, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Pariah state ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Pariah state ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Alexgt2007&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Pariah state}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1335625514 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 07:10, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics


{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to ''' post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people''', a topic designated as '''''contentious ↗'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as ''contentious topics''. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee ↗. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators ↗ have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully and constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

<p>Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics <em>procedures</em>, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard ↗ or you may learn more about this contentious topic ↗. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. </p>}}<!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert/first -->l

link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ You have recently made edits related to . This is a standard message to inform you that is a designated contentious topic. This message <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics ↗. <!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert --> '''<span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="color: gray;">Acroterion</span> <small><span style="color: gray;">(talk)</span></small></span>''' 12:56, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

:Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗ etc.



Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. Please slow down on adding this ill-defined category (and similar ones) to articles. First, you should know about WP:CATDEF ↗ and WP:POVCAT ↗. Second, you should see that the parent category :Category:Anti-Hispanic and Latin American sentiment ↗ explicitly says that "This category is for issues relating to Hispanophobia. It must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly anti-Hispanic/Hispanophobic." Ed&nbsp;<sup>[talk]&nbsp;[OMT ↗]</sup> 04:55, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

:Category:Anti-Belizean sentiment ↗ has been nominated for deletion



<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>:Category:Anti-Belizean sentiment ↗ has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization ↗ guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''the category's entry ↗''' on the categories for discussion ↗ page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 14:58, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

:Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗ has been nominated for deletion



<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>:Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗ has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization ↗ guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at '''the category's entry ↗''' on the categories for discussion ↗ page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 15:06, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Los Comunistas ¿Dónde están? ↗ moved to draftspace



Thanks for your contributions to Los Comunistas ¿Dónde están? ↗. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because '''it needs more sources to establish notability''' and '''There art
There are currently two articles from Debate, a reliable source, however we require at least two reliable sources independent of each other. The tone of the article is not encyclopaedic.'''.
I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page ↗.
When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Boynamedsue (talk) 08:25, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Genocide categories



You seem to be adding genocide categories to a bunch of random pages that make no mention of genocide. Genocide is a distinct form of atrocity. Not all atrocities are genocides. Please refrain from throwing a bunch of random pages and categories into genocide categories, as this may be seen as agenda pushing. Thank you. <span style="background:#0047AB;border-radius:9999px;padding:1px 8px;color:white;"><span style="background-color:#0047AB;color:#F8BF45">'''PizzaKing13'''</span></span> (''¡Hablame!'') 🍕👑 04:31, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

"Third Position" vs "Third Way" categorization



I have reverted the recent change from Third Way to Third Position in article Nuevas Ideas ↗.
While the terms are linguistically similar, they represent vastly different political ideologies. Third Way refers to a centrist synthesis of social and economic policies, whereas Third Position is a specific branch of far-right, ultranationalist politics.
Changing this category without a clear consensus or overwhelming evidence from reliable sources violates WP:NPOV ↗. Furthermore, the editor ignored the explicit hidden HTML comment in the source code warning against this exact conflation.
Please do not re-add "Third Position" unless you can provide scholarly or high-quality journalistic sources that specifically define the party using that terminology. Owl.Haworth (talk) 02:09, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

:1. The Third Position isn't far-right nor far-left, it's a political spectrum.
:2. Bukele has declared that isn't right-wing nor left-wing in occasions various, it's nationalist. Alexgt2007 (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
::? Alexgt2007 (talk) 23:24, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26



Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Francisco Otaviano ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edward Thornton ↗ was added. Such links are usually incorrect ↗, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. <small>(Read the FAQ{{*}} Join us at the DPL WikiProject ↗.)</small>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Unsourced anti-X sentiment additions



You have made several additions to various pages adding categories of "Anti-X sentiment", often without any mention of such sentiment on pages. Anti-X sentiment implies overt discrimination, and putting such categories on pages unrelated to discrimination is not acceptable, and on biography pages, violates WP:BLP ↗ if unsourced. I asked you to provide a source for Keith Rowley ↗, and you reverted my edit, provided no source, and told me to google it. This is not how Wikipedia works. Please provide source when you add such categories to pages and/or ensure that the page actually mentions anti-X sentiment. <span style="background:#0047AB;border-radius:9999px;padding:1px 8px;color:white;"><span style="background-color:#0047AB;color:#F8BF45">'''PizzaKing13'''</span></span> (''¡Hablame!'') 🍕👑 00:51, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

:On the same page, an action is described that could fit into the category, you are very arbitrary when undoing edits. Alexgt2007 (talk) 00:53, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
:: I don't see any such "Anti-Venezuelan sentiment". All I see is the coast guard fired on a Venezuelan vessel, which is not "anti-Venezuelan sentiment". <span style="background:#0047AB;border-radius:9999px;padding:1px 8px;color:white;"><span style="background-color:#0047AB;color:#F8BF45">'''PizzaKing13'''</span></span> (''¡Hablame!'') 🍕👑 00:56, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
::: Also, avoid edit warring. Wikipedia:3RR ↗ <span style="background:#0047AB;border-radius:9999px;padding:1px 8px;color:white;"><span style="background-color:#0047AB;color:#F8BF45">'''PizzaKing13'''</span></span> (''¡Hablame!'') 🍕👑 00:57, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
:::The anti-Venezuelan sentiment comes in the action itself, at least within the filters where most Wikipedia pages are, their government also stood out for other policies that affected Venezuelans and actions. Alexgt2007 (talk) 01:00, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Furthermore, regarding the Football War, it can be classified as anti-Salvadoran and anti-Honduran sentiments, because the war exacerbated a feeling of anti-nationalism among the people of the two nations. Alexgt2007 (talk) 01:08, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
:@Alexgt2007, you have just done the same on William Ewart Gladstone ↗. Please stop. You need to support these claims with sources. <span style="background:#F1C40F; color:#000; padding:2px;">'''SamWilson989'''</span> (talk) 22:12, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
::Sorry, I'll include the source; there's also an anti-Austrian quote from him in the article "Anti-Austrian Sentiment." Alexgt2007 (talk) 22:20, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
:::@SamWilson989 To be fair, you could also check Anti-Austrian sentiment ↗ instead of dismissing it outright; you could go and verify if it was true. Alexgt2007 (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
::::WP:CATV ↗ states "It should be clear from verifiable information '''in the article '''why it was placed in each of its categories." Emphasis mine. Categories appear on article pages without annotations or direct citations to justify or explain their addition. If you want to add such a category, you should add the sourced claim on the article itself. <span style="background:#F1C40F; color:#000; padding:2px;">'''SamWilson989'''</span> (talk) 22:40, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Alexgt2007, Joan of Arc opposed the English forces occupying France during the Hundred Years' War, she was not anti-British, as that is an anachronistic term in this context. Everyone here is telling you the same thing, stop adding these categories indiscriminately unless they are supported by sourced content in the article body. I warned you in November about not engaging in original research. Base your contributions on what reliable sources state. Do not ask others to check Wikipedia articles, as they cannot be used as references, see WP:USERGENERATED ↗. Shellwood (talk) 09:03, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026




25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hi Alexgt2007! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore a version of :William Ewart Gladstone ↗. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy ↗. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages ↗ in order to try to reach a consensus ↗ with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement&#32;at {{TALKPAGENAME:William Ewart Gladstone}} ↗, please use one of the dispute resolution options ↗ that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-ewsoft --> Rsk6400 (talk) 04:56, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗


48px|left|alt=|link= ↗
{{Quote box|quote=<p>If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article ↗.</p><p>You may want to consider using the Article Wizard ↗ to help you create articles.</p>|width=20%|align=right}}
A tag has been placed on :Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗ requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion ↗, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 March 7#Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by visiting the page ↗ and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Category%3AAnti-Argentine+sentiment|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here ↗. <!-- Template:Db-repost-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> Mclay1 (talk) 06:03, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Recreating deleted categories



Hi. A category you created (:Category:Anti-Argentine sentiment ↗) was previously deleted in a CfD discussion ↗. Please do not recreate it. You have previously received talk page messages about this sort of category, and you were notified of the deletion discussion. Please review the policies and guidelines on Wikipedia categories ↗. Mclay1 (talk) 06:08, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Category:Anti-Belizean sentiment ↗


48px|left|alt=|link= ↗
{{Quote box|quote=<p>If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article ↗.</p><p>You may want to consider using the Article Wizard ↗ to help you create articles.</p>|width=20%|align=right}}
A tag has been placed on :Category:Anti-Belizean sentiment ↗ requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion ↗, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 March 7#Category:Anti-Belizean sentiment ↗. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by visiting the page ↗ and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Category%3AAnti-Belizean+sentiment|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here ↗. <!-- Template:Db-repost-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> Mclay1 (talk) 06:12, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Trumpism and fascism



I've seen some of your recent fascism-related edits, particularly those that have to do with Trumpism, and I would suggest, before you wade into these waters, you should familiarize yourself with the state of the literature. Donald_Trump_and_fascism#References ↗ is a good starting point. Your own instinct that Peronism is more akin to fascism than Trumpism is not strongly supported by the literature. Simonm223 (talk) 18:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

:To be honest, anyone who is truly knowledgeable about fascism and the Third Position doesn't find these "academic" labels serious. Fascism isn't a label, nor is it what Umberto Eco called ur-fascism. I would tell you to read "The Doctrine of Fascism" so you can begin to see what Fascism really is, and not these polarizing and crude labels that are equivalent to calling AOC and Sanders "communists." Alexgt2007 (talk) 18:43, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
:It also seems you know very little about Peronism, but the original variant, not the Kirchnerist version. Perón, in his book "The Organized Community," explained the similarities between his doctrine and the Spanish Falange, and another fact: the French fascist Jacques de Mahieu was one of its ideologues. Alexgt2007 (talk) 18:47, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
::I'm sure Mussolini's writing on fascism in 1932 is not more relevant than contemporary academic work. Furthermore I was ''not'' saying that there is no parallel between Peronism and fascism, merely that it is not more pronounced than the parallels between Trumpism and fascism, contrary to your belief. I'm also quite familiar with Eco frankly I like quite a lot of what he had to say in the Ur Fascism essay though I have my critiques and consider some of the theoretical work in A Thousand Plateaus ↗ more apropos as a diagnostic. Again, before stomping through a contemporary CTOP armed with century-old definitions, I'd suggest you read some recent scholarship. Simonm223 (talk) 18:53, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
:::If you consider what Mussolini said in 1932 irrelevant to defining fascism, then what Karl Marx and Lenin said about communism is irrelevant today—that's the logic. Contemporary academic works often present a simplistic and detached version of what fascism is; it's like asking Milton Friedman or Ayn Rand to define communism. Serious scholars specializing in fascism, like Emilio Gentile, have already debunked Eco, calling his thesis "ahistorical" and "trivial." Alexgt2007 (talk) 19:04, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
::::Being dismissive of contemporary academic work is not exactly what Wikipedia is all about. I'll leave my statements here at this point, I think we both understand each other very well after all and there's no point in an endless back and forth as we each toss our preferred scholars at each other, but you do not have consensus to obscure links between Trumpism and Fascism. Simonm223 (talk) 19:11, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::My opinion is that Wikipedia was created to enrich the knowledge of billions of people worldwide. Therefore, in an ideal world, Wikipedia should prioritize primary sources and serious historians on the subject over editorial activists. Primary and direct sources on the concept should be prioritized over what outsiders say. Alexgt2007 (talk) 19:20, 27 May 2026 (UTC)