User talk:Calebjely

August 2016

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Talk:Fascism, you may be blocked from editing. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive editing according to Wikipedia is "a pattern of editing that may extend over a long time or many articles". My first ever post, by definition, cannot be disruptive editing. Please stop violating Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding unsubstantiated commentary to my user page as well as the Talk:Fascism page because of your political bias towards socialism, as exemplified on your user pageUser:Orangemike. Using your power as an Administrator to intimidate editors acting in good faith is ironic and revealing, considering your self-declared political bent and the topic of fascism. --Calebjely (talk) 18:37, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

"may extend". In this case, you started right out with a trolling edit, requesting an edit that goes against the consensus of all who study fascism's history, while throwing in silly assertions such as "FDR=fascist dictator". I am proud to say that my own political views (openly disclosed) do not influence my edits here, far less my administrative actions. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

You are ignoring the prefatory clause. "a pattern of editing". It does not matter whether it "may extend over a long time or many articles", because a single post cannot be considered a pattern in the first place. Not to mention it was only your comment which did not build upon the dispute or provide any information. All you did was call me a "troll", mark the request as answered, and send me an inflammatory notice, without any argument. You are the editor engaging in disruptive editing.

Also FDR was the only President who would not give up his Presidency after 2 terms. FDR attempted to stack the court to give himself even more power. FDR threw people into concentration camps and took away their property because of their race. There are 34 references to FDR and fascism on his Wiki page. Wikipedia - Criticism of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

As the Fascism page states, the term is "now usually used pejoratively by political opponents", which is exactly what the original edit is doing. My edit was a request to remove a political driven false statement with no logic or consensus. My request was backed up by multiple other editors on the talk page in which there was no consensus. Only a closure by a biased Admin. Per Wikipedia, "The burden of evidence rests with the editor who initially provides the information or wishes the information to remain." I was requesting a deletion. The burden of proof is on those who "wishes the information to remain". Stating Consensus without any evidence is not an answer. It is simply disruptive. So either provide actual evidence that small government is consistent with Fascism, or do what Wikipedia dictates, and delete it.