W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: Mhaot

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


CS1 error on Capital punishment by country ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Capital punishment by country ↗, 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–%20Mhaot&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Capital punishment by country}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1174738459 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:43, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

October 2023


25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not add or change content, as you did at :New Zealand First ↗, without citing a reliable source ↗. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources ↗ and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Your source does not mention syncretic politics<!-- Template:uw-unsourced2 -->-<span style="font-family:cursive; color:grey;">gadfium</span> 17:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

:The Wikipedia Page of "Syncretic politics" has mentioned New Zealand First has a key example
:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretic_politics#Other_examples Mhaot (talk) 01:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
::Plus a very similar party in Australia (Katter's Australia Party) is mentioned as Syncretic in Wikipedia
::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katter%27s_Australian_Party Mhaot (talk) 01:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
::Thanks for pointing it out. An opinion piece is not a suitable source, and as I said before, it doesn't mention syncretic politics.----

Nomination of :Radical pro-Beijing camp ↗ for deletion


<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :Radical pro-Beijing camp ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be deleted ↗.

The article will be discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical pro-Beijing camp ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> Simonm223 (talk) 13:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Stop changing



Stop changing political party positions without consensus and sources. No sources state the Country Liberal Party is right-wing or even has a major social conservative wing. It is centre-right. The Northern Territory is not the same as other states and territories, as the only real factionalism there is in the Labor Party (Right vs Left, the former being by far more dominant, especially historically). Schestos (talk) 10:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Tall Poppy Syndrome


Please stop removing sourced material from Tall Poppy Syndrome ↗ because of your personal experience. That's not an accepted basis for editing. The term may not be as prevalent in Canada than in Australia or New Zealand - or you may not have personally heard it- but it is in use as per multiple Candian sources dating back a number of years. You also seem to be making an assumption based on your generation. You may not hear it among Canadians in your peer group but it is commonly used among younger professionals and women in particular. Wellington Bay (talk) 10:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

:Under your argument then every English speaking country should be listed,
:UK for example has various sources yet it is not added
:https://www.cityam.com/it-is-time-britain-rid-itself-of-its-entrenched-tall-poppy-syndrome/
:https://northwestbylines.co.uk/news/equality/tall-poppy-syndrome-the-price-ambitious-women-pay-for-success/
:https://metro.co.uk/2023/08/03/are-you-suffering-from-tall-poppy-syndrome-at-work-19235480/
:And even the USA
:https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/tall-poppy-syndrome#examples
:https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_practice/resources/law-practice-today/2024/may-2024/cutting-down-tall-poppy-syndrome/#:~:text=Tall%20Poppy%20Syndrome%20(TPS)%20occurs,effect%20on%20women%20of%20color. ↗
:This source has mentioned the TPS is mainly a prevalent as a Australia and New Zealand term
:https://douggarland.com/pdf/america.pdf Mhaot (talk) 11:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
::Updated: At least you have founded a compromise Mhaot (talk) 11:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message



<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2024 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. 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 2024 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2024|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/09&oldid=1258243804 -->

New Zealand Labour Party



I recommend we change it back to a centrist party, and that's because the party has taken a move away from its centre-left base ever since 2017, there's a large range of sources included on this including the ones used for that section changed and others used on the page in other sections

They haven't taken any nominally "centre-left" policies as of late, refusing even capital gains tax, have adopted conservative policies on law and order and on economics have really just continued the policies of John Key from National not changing much

"''Reverting back to centre-left as the sources for Centre are just opinion based and a minor description plus it is a constitutionally a social democratic party which has to be centre-left''"

Not all the sources are opinion based and I don't know what "minor description" means, but regardless the sources do go into detail on how they've changed away from the centre, whereas previous sources are just outdated going back to 2003 even

Adding to that, constitutionally it's a democratic socialist party, it's described as a social democratic party in theory and pragmatic/moderate and even right wing in policy and practice

Just because it's "social democratic" or it calls itself as such doesn't mean it's centre-left, in fact there's many cases globally of the opposite case. Blairism and the 21st century SPD have both adopted the political positions of its conservative opposition (with Blairism specifically being called everything from centre to right wing), in Bolivia their social democratic party is described as being right wing and far-right, on and on

Because the sources I provided, although some of them are opinion articles, all detail ''why'' they characterise the party as centrist, therefore I will revert it back to a centrist party until you can provide an argument and sources that go against... everyone's characterisation of the party and its leaders as centrist, moderate, and even leaning right Destroyerbirb (talk) 10:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

:1) There was a discussion whether to change political positions (from centre-left to centre) on the Labour Party (UK) ↗ talk page with sources provided similar to ones your shared but there isn't yet a no consensus and it was decided suspend discussion until at least January hence it will keep the centre-left political position. If there isn't a consensus to change from centre-left to centre on the sister parties (Labour Party (UK) ↗, Australian Labor Party ↗ etc.), so there shouldn't be a change for New Zealand Labour Party ↗
:Talk:Labour Party (UK) ↗
:2) The party you are referring in Bolivia is just named Social Democratic Movement ↗ but never in the context as a Social democracy ↗
:3) "<nowiki>''</nowiki>They haven't taken any nominally "centre-left" policies as of late, refusing even capital gains tax, have adopted conservative policies on law and order and on economics have really just continued the policies of John Key from National not changing much'"
:Just because they didn't take nominally "centre-left" policies or try to appease conservative voters does not change political positions here are some examples
:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/oct/17/labor-negative-gearing-law-changes-ruled-out-albanese-copacabana-home - Australian Labor Party ↗
:https://labour.org.uk/change/take-back-our-streets/ - Labour Party (UK) ↗
:https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/07/12/denmark-refugees-frederiksen-danish-left-adopted-a-far-right-immigration-policy/ - Social Democrats (Denmark) ↗ Mhaot (talk) 12:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
::If you still dispute, please discuss on the Talk Page ↗ Mhaot (talk) 12:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 5



Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Endorsements in the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Katie Allen ↗. 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) 07:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Template:Far-right politics in Australia



Some of the stuff you're adding that template and the pages that you're adding that template to is borderline and I'm not sure that reliable sources would be on your side. Can I suggest being a tiny bit more conservative in the people you include to the template and the pages you add the template to. ''<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>''<sup><b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b></sup> 14:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I see no sources in Trumpism ↗ for your recent edit



I'm surprised you don't realise you need sources. <span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span> talk 12:20, 24 February 2025 (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 ''procedures'', you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard ↗ or you may learn more about this contentious topic here ↗. 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 --> <span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span> talk 12:23, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message



<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. 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 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2025/Coordination/MM/08&oldid=1322758940 -->

Pauline Hanson's One Nation ↗



Hi,

I see you have reverted my edit removing the "far-right" label from Pauline Hanson's One Nation ↗ saying that the sources show it is a part of the far right movement in Australia. However, those sources are dated and mostly rely on figures such as Fraser Anning ↗ who are no longer in the party, to prove that it is far right. Those sources no longer represent the party today. Thank you for your attention to this matter and for contributing to the worldwide encyclopaedia!

-AuspolScribe AuspolScribe (talk) 06:14, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

:I hope we can reach a consensus on this matter AuspolScribe (talk) 06:15, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Racism claims



I have notice that you have provided contentious tags to multiple articles that deal with Australian politics, it is to best avoid this unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution. See MOS:LABEL ↗ and WP:NPOV ↗. &#126;2026-58078-1 ↗ (talk) 05:59, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31



An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hansonism ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anti-Islam ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Explanation



Hello, its true such infobox exists also in article of Trumpism. Its recent blunder over last months. This infobox should be removed from Trumpism and other pages too. Its wrong usage. See Infobox Template documentation. ↗ Thank you. ThecentreCZ (talk) 04:29, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

June 2026



25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not add or change content, as you did at :Drew Pavlou ↗, without citing a reliable source ↗. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources ↗ to see how to add references to an article. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-unsourced2 --> – Demetrios1993 (talk) 07:36, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Uncited contentious material - June 2026



The policy on biographies of living persons ↗ make it clear that content in biographical articles, or biographic material in other articles, is to be held to the absolute highest standards of verifiability. In general, contentious material in such articles needs to be sourced. &#126;2026-36444-78 ↗ (talk) 15:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)