User talk:Trueitagain

Welcome![edit]

Hi Trueitagain! 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:

Learn more about editing

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:

Get help at the Teahouse

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

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:07, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022[edit]

Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. Andre🚐 23:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How is it possible to discuss what should or should not go into an article without discussing the topic? And how can sources which are implicated by the subject matter be considered reliable on the subject? Trueitagain (talk) 01:09, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS WP:NOTLEAD... please read and refer to... reliable sources are considered reliable and unreliable sources are considered unreliable... we do not publish original research so your opinions on what is "implicated" are not relevant here. Andre🚐 01:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Andre🚐 19:14, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Andre🚐 23:50, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Andre🚐 04:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments to avoid[edit]

Wikipedia is biased
Editors are Biased
They are excluding right wing sources

If you continue down those paths, you will wind up blocked from the page. Sources carry the day here. Many "Right Wing" media (and plenty of "far-left" media) have shot themselves in the foot over the last 6 years and forgot how to separate opinion from fact. Those decisions weren't made lightly and you can read the discussions at WP:RSP for how the community decided a source was not reliable. Edit warring in sub-par sources or being continualy confrontational is not the way to succeed. Legitimate points will be dismissed by editors focusing on the hyperbole. So tone it down and if you want information included, find the sources. They are all that matters at the end of the day. Slywriter (talk) 03:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning[edit]

Your demeanor on talkpages, as in the diffs listed here, is lowering the tone and fogging up the atmosphere for everybody. Start being civil and assuming good faith or you will be blocked. Bishonen | tålk 11:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

December 2022[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 12:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the user's post-block rant and revoked TPA.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]