User talk:6millionOranges

Welcome![edit]

Hello, 6millionOranges, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Also, could you please explain what your username means?

TFD (talk) 01:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given the subjects you've edited and your username, please explain the derivation. Acroterion (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My username? Randomly generated on the Internet. Now I think it's ridiculous that you (an everyone else) keep changing National Socialist or NSDAP back to "Nazi". This is not valid historically, in fact the only reason it exists is because the allied forces used it as derogatory term. For a site like Wikipedia, it is unprofessional and irresponsible to use a derogatory term in regards to one of the worlds major modern events. I will continue to correct this unprecedented reversion to the immature way and express my freedom to do so. Nothing I have changed goes against terms and services as it is not misinformation or promotion of National Socialism, it's simply the name of the organisation. It's bad enough that your page "Nazism" is uneditable as if it's a form of bias (which is may as well be). Do you know National Socialist Germans never use the term "Nazi" at any time whatsoever until late in the war when civilians were in contact with allies? Look it up, I bet you can't find a source that says anything about it being used by the NSDAP leaders or population. The term Nazi was pitted by the allies/other political enemies and considering Nazism is not the original term that the real National Socialists used therefor National Socialism is the correct and professional term. You wouldn't call the Soviet Union page "Commies" wouldn't you? Then why call the NSDAP "Nazis". "Nazi" is valid to Neo Nazis because Neo Nazis and other White supremacists are dumb and degenerate enough to call themselves that (aside the fact that no Neo Nazi group actually have National Socialists views, ironic). I request that this is not changed on the basis that it is absolutely fair that they should be referred to as their historic name and not a propaganda piece

Also the SS had to prove their German history all the way back to 1750 which most historians agree on, that needs to be corrected from "1800".

Thank you.

Sorry, not buying the "randomly generated" business. Acroterion (talk) 00:37, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And what am I suppose to do about that? What exactly is offensive about my username? "Acroterion", should I be offended by you considering some pretty bad empires from the dawn of civilisation have used Acroterions to show their power and influence? Sounds ridiculous doesn't it? That's because it is.. If you took it to court you'd probably be mocked.

Your username is offensive if you're planning on editing on Nazi topics, because six million is the most common figure for Jews killed in the Holocaust. Most people will find it offensive and recommend you change it or abandon this account. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:39, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Listen here Dianna, I have not once expressed anti-Semitic sentiments nor is my username affiliated with such views. If you're going to draw a rough conclusion as unwarranted and immature as yours, I suggest you leave this to the older people. Truly disgusting how you would compare my username to that of the death count in the concentration camps/ kill raids on villages. If you drew this conclusion from the fact that I corrected "Nazi" to "National Socialist" (that being the OFFICIAL term) then, again, you need to leave this 'discussion' to the older people.

Yours sincerely,

An older person

Hello there, I'm writing you to discuss your username. My first reaction to your name was to question how on Earth your name could be considered offensive. A random number followed by a random fruit, that's quite innocuous if you ask me. I noted above the concerns that other user's have expressed regarding the loss of life of Jews in the Second Word War and the implication that your editing interests and your name have on this fact. There's a guideline at Wikipedia to assume good faith and personally I like to do so as much as possible. I'm unconcerned whether your name was randomly generated or if you chose it yourself, I'll AGF and say that your username (the implied 6 million Jews) and interests (in the NSDAP and WWII) are an unfortunate coincidence. That said this coincidence is going to cause unnecessary trouble for you - as you are no doubt already aware. I don't know you or your personal views and I don't like to make assumptions about it, however, for your own sake I have to recommend that you undertake a username change to either drop the "million", or change it to "billion" if you like, or alternatively just drop the 6. Mr rnddude (talk) 14:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add; also please make sure to sign your posts with four consecutive tildes; ~~~~. This is so that it is easier to track and respond to comments. Mr rnddude (talk) 14:29, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well rnddude, I have absolutely no desire to change my username as it is not my fault that you (and apparent other people) take offence over something completely irrelevant to my username. Again, I will state, I have not changed any significant information regarding the Waffen SS or their affiliations with history. I simply corrected Wikipedia's unprofessional and bias naming of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. If this site takes itself seriously at all it'll fix this problem. If you're worried about broken links, fix them with the correct terms.

Offense is taken and not given. I'm unconcerned with what you edit, that is none of my business. I brought it up because it was going to be a problem. Carry on, Mr rnddude (talk) 16:20, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016[edit]

Your recent editing history at Waffen-SS shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Your edit introduces red links and links to incorrect articles. Please stop. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three different editors have reverted your edit so it looks like consensus is against you introducing these changes. I am restoring the previous version. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only 3 active users, probably control freaks as Wikipedia users seem to be.

That's okay, I'll revert twice every 24 hours. I'm not letting unprecedented admin abuse get to me.

Being mean to Nazis?[edit]

One of our rules here is that we call an article subject by its most commonly used name in English. English speakers talking about the NSDAP, including historians, refer to them "Nazis." We do not care a damn what the scheißkopfen called themselves, we go by what ordinary English speakers call them. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then refer to them as NATIONAL SOCIALIST/ Or quite simply NSDAP. Typing a few extra letters does not hurt, I did my edits in 15 seconds buddy.

Nazism= derogatory National Socialist(ism)= correct ENGLISH translation of Nationalsozialistische— Preceding unsigned comment added by 6millionOranges (talk • contribs)

"derogatory"? How can one insult an NSDAP member, the lowest of history's swine, the role model for all that is vile, hypocritical, hateful and prejudiced in Western culture? --Orange Mike | Talk 03:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]