User talk:Freespeech2024

Welcome!

Hi Freespeech2024! 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! —Bagumba (talk) 08:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest that you be aware of WP:FREESPEECH. Wikipedia is not a free speech forum, but a project to write an encyclopedia. It is operated by a private organization that can set rules about what content can appear on its computers, just as you can set rules about what is said within the four walls of your residence. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We should have a commitment towards objectivity; Wikipedia for too long has been viewed as overtly left-leaning and biased, and free speech will preclude such faults. Freespeech2024 (talk) 16:25, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and there is no free speech in encyclopedias. TheWikiToby (talk) 05:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The irony is that you feel so empowered to write indiscriminately on my Talk Page. Freespeech2024 (talk) 05:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello, I'm R0paire-wiki. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Stacey Abrams, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! R0paire-wiki (talk) 03:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/29/stacey-abramss-rhetorical-twist-being-an-election-denier/ Freespeech2024 (talk) 03:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Stacey Abrams. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalize is a bold claim. I was stating a simple fact. Freespeech2024 (talk) 20:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Stacey Abrams. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Generalrelative (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Donald Trump. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Generalrelative (talk) 03:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

331dot (talk) 00:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]