User talk:TrumanLA

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 the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour. 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.

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.

Acroterion (talk) 02:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commentary[edit]

Don't intersperse your own comments into those of others - iit has the effect of appearing to alter the other editors' comments. Additionally, if you keep on using "SJW" to label those who disagree with you, you will face editing restrictions. Acroterion (talk) 02:07, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Where can I learn to reply in compliance with policy?

Your message provides a "reply" option; will that persist or remain atypical?

I realize "truth" isn't decided "democratically." However many believe, 1+1=3 there must persist a means of establishing objective truth. My goal is based on beliefs usually being incomplete and warrant criticism or bolstering.

Members do not pick up scholarly material, formulate a well-founded opinion, then, provide the sources that formulated that opinion. My concern is that the genesis of content emerges in exactly the opposite manner.

I've heard no one will meaningfully change wikipedia's culture. Certainly not as result of the remarks by an obscure member.

Some topics will attract people who self-identify as 'SJWs' but, I'll refrain from its subjective-use as a pejorative. What are the qualifications of citations? Can major filmmakers constitute a citable source? Where can I learn about this?

Thanks. TrumanLA (talk) 22:08, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to "sanctioned account / remarks" can whomever took the time to make this modification to my account also take the time to validate the claim?

Provide a link to Wikipedia's

- orthodoxies

- infractions and

- articulate "Wikipedia's boundaries"

Is the issue one of my remarks being subjective? Or:

Is the issue a result of my remarks being false?

If they're false, I'd appreciate someone falsifying my disputed-comments which initiated the "sanction" (or at least categorize my remarks as 'unfalsifiable' if falsification isn't possible, and acknowledge the problem is one of being an opinion which violates some policy.

It is listed as a principle [in] wikipedia's page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

Thus, I hope it's not an excessive request to be categorized and demonstrated as either false (wrong) or if it cannot meet such a low epistemological standard, explain the beliefs it infringes on. TrumanLA (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]