User talk:Asukite

Summarize Timeline Fact Check

Hi @Asukite,

You reverted my edit of adding "far-right" to the lead of British Columbia's political party OneBC due to WP:UNDUE. However, nearly every political party in BC and Canada includes their political position within the lead, including: The BC NDP, BC United, Liberal Party of Canada, Conservative Party of Canada, People's Party of Canada, and many more.

If you are looking for sources indicating this is the political position of the party, here are a few:

https://pressprogress.ca/onebc-far-right-bc-party-explainer/

https://cfjctoday.com/2025/11/18/tkemlups-kukwpi7-calls-for-onebc-leader-brodies-resignation/

I'm confused how this would be considered inappropriate to add considering this is the format followed by every other political party in Canada, and it is clearly true cited information. I appreciate your input!

Thanks, Fingray7 (talk) 02:11, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

@Fingray7 Each of those articles indicates a position which is more center-oriented than the aforementioned article, with exception of People's Party of Canada, which references multiple sources. Your addition of "far-right" to OneBC did not cite a single source. I will again point you to WP:UNDUE.

While I won't dispute that addition of far-right is applicable to OneBC, we need more sources specifically indicating that ideology in order to ensure balanced coverage. The article's sourcing does not adequately indicate the significant usage of the term "far-right" in reliable sources. The first source you've offered isn't even cited in the page, and their about page gives me doubts as to their neutrality on the topic, while the second seems more reliable, it is yet a single source.

The inclusion of extremist tags such as "far-right" or otherwise are contentious and deserve better sourcing. If you believe (and reading this article, I'm inclined to agree with the potential) that such a tag is justifiable, we should have better sourcing so that we can appropriately back this claim in the lead, otherwise it is tantamount to WP:UNDUE coverage and original research. ASUKITE 02:27, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I'll also add that I typically avoid politics-related editing out of personal preference, so if you wish to dispute me further, I would rather not argue the topic beyond what I have already added, and will not stop you otherwise. I do, however, have confidence that any unjustified edits will be reverted by somebody else.

I would advise relying on consensus for controversial changes to articles, and engaging with the community while preserving your arguments, rather than removing them Special:diff/1335173087 Special:diff/1334846453. ASUKITE 02:43, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I only removed unhelpful discussions with unfounded claims which I would consider vandalism from my page. They do not belong there. Fingray7 (talk) 02:56, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't think of the label "far-right" as being contentious (I even think OneBC would most likely endorse that label), however I would agree it needs sourcing. I should have included those sources, you are right.

As per your claim "the article's sourcing does not adequately indicate the significant usage of the term "far-right" in reliable sources," this is true, however the article hasn't truly been updated since the formation of the party, and needs a significant update. There is no real inclusion of OneBC's political positions within the page, something that needs to be included. I'll leave out the label until the rest of the page is updated (something I'll work on in the next few weeks if no one else gets to it).

Thanks, Fingray7 (talk) 02:55, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for that - and sorry for including those diffs. I spend perhaps too much time investigating vandalism and sometimes forget that new editors, even ones who are bold enough to get involved in contentious topics like politics, can be constructive. ASUKITE 03:03, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

You are currently engaged in edit warring. I instructed you to check the Talk page and do your research. Instead, you decided to levy a false accusation of vandalism against me and abused your moderation powers by threatening to block me from editing. Knock it off. ~2026-19051-51 (talk) 03:54, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-19051-51 I'm just a regular editor. Well - I can see your IP address. You're on your third revert on that page, so don't expect having a second TA is going to exempt you from WP:3RR. I won't revert you again, so feel free to do as you wish. ASUKITE 04:00, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I edited Divine Word University page and you removed everything. Hoe4Hozier (talk) 04:28, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Hoe4Hozier Special:Diff/1348761138, where you added the text "Divine Word University's social scene is nothing short of exciting." under the Social heading. That text was likely written by an LLM, as well as the rest of that edit. ASUKITE 04:33, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Omg. "Divine Word University's social scene is nothing short of exciting." If someone needs AI to write that they need to go read a book. That is the easiest thing in the world to write when you're a writer wtf? Is this cause I'm black? Hoe4Hozier (talk) 04:37, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes. I'm absolutely discriminating here. The fact that you are black is tantamount to this discussion, as I am obviously capable of determining skin pigment over the internet. You've caught me! I will have to now relocate to another planet.

That's my humor speaking. It's terrible.

I've read a few too many books. "Nothing short of exciting" is pure POV and unencyclopedic. ASUKITE 04:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Jeez calm down. Okay, Okay. I'm virtually raising my white flag right now. But on a completely different note, do you know when George R.R Martin is releasing Winds of Winter? Hoe4Hozier (talk) 04:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Also I was joking about the whole black thing. I wanted to know what it felt like to use the race card. Apologies kind sir. Hoe4Hozier (talk) 04:48, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

My very first ever edit to Wikipedia was to revert a vandal who spoiled me on the plot of Harry Potter. I then did some vandalism myself, as an IP. That's part of what got me interested in reverting vandalism - you should try it. WP:WikiShield is fun and easy to use. ASUKITE 04:52, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hang on.

As a Potterhead, thank you for your service. But I'm laughing out loud because I never thought Wikipedia would have drama. Hoe4Hozier (talk) 04:56, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

It's effectively a social network - there is more drama than you could imagine. ASUKITE 04:57, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm intrigued now. You gotta tell me some more.

It is a social network isn't it? I just can't wrap my gen-z brain around that. No offence but I equate Wikipedia to old newspapers (kinda). Hoe4Hozier (talk) 04:59, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

My interpretation of file renaming criterion number five does not include "miscapitalization" in most cases. File names may be all-lowercase, all-upercase, every word capitalized, only the first word capitalized, etc.; they have their own natural casing conventions that are not traditional, making many things a style choice rather than an error. Much closer to what not to rename than criterion five. In the example in question, nothing is capitalized (except the first letter, which I believe the software insists upon). Someone else may move it, or it may be declined again. Warmest regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 07:54, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:04, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi just completed some RD1 revdels you flagged thanks. Just a small note and fyi you should only tag revisions up to the one prior to the edit in which you removed the (last of the) violation. You don't need to/shouldn't include that revision itself. e.g if you look at this history page, you had tagged five diffs but I only revdel'd the earliest four, and you'll see it's not possible to see any of the copyrighted content from there as the prev button on that diff is disabled also. Best. Mfield (Oi!) 01:41, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

@Mfield Thanks! I haven't requested a revdel in a while and forgot that. I will keep that in mind (and I'm glad you noticed that and didn't unnecessarily suppress revisions). ASUKITE 01:48, 24 April 2026 (UTC)