User talk:HollyKST

Welcome![edit]

Hello, HollyKST, 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 click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 13 September[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Ecocide page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ecocide[edit]

Good evening, mrs HollyKST. I reverted your blatantly point of view edits on Ecocide which where just short of glorifying mrs. Polly Higgins and her activities, publishments and website. Based on your edits, I highly suspect you are working for someone else in editing Wikipedia. If this is the case than you might have to gie full disclosure see Terms of Use para 4. In any case it seems like you are trying to use Wikipedia, to push your point of view, and to use it for activism regarding the implementation of an international crime of ecocide. Wikipedia is not meant as a platform for activism, and strives to be neutral. Your contributions should reflect this, hence I kept only those parts which where sufficiently verifiable and neutral. Greetings, Perudotes (talk) 15:09, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Deliberatly) misquoting sources[edit]

Good evening, mrs. HollyKST. I was reading your recent contributions to the ecocide article. And noted you where once again pushing your own point of view by blatently misquoting sources. You added the following quote from UN Doc A/C.6/50/SR.12 "“the Special Rapporteur on the topic had presented his thirteenth report recommending that only 6 of the 12 crimes identified in first reading for inclusion in the Code should be retained, namely… wilful and severe damage to the environment (article 26).” thereby suggesting there was some support to keep the crime of ecocide in the draft code. However, the original quote shows a whole different view: "the Special Rapporteur on the topic had presented his thirteenth report recommending that only 6 of the 12 crimes identified in first reading for inclusion in the Code should be retained, namely, aggression (article 15), genocide (article 19), systematic or mass violations of human rights (article 21), exceptionally serious war crimes (article 22), international terrorism (article 24) and illicit traffic in narcotic drugs (article 25). The six remaining crimes, which the Special Rapporteur had proposed leaving out because they had given rise to opposition or reservations on the part of various Governments, were: the threat of aggression (article 16), intervention (article 17), colonial domination and other forms of alien domination (article 18), apartheid (article 20), the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries (article 23) and wilful and severe damage to the environment (article 26)." I find it hard to believe that someone who is browsing through several highly specified UN documents, somehow misquotes this section in the way you did. Would you care to eleborate? In the meanwhile I once again deleted this blatantly false contribution. Greetings Perudotes (talk) 00:36, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]