User talk:2600:1700:2950:3CD0:4477:7C16:B95C:5054

April 2021

Hello, I'm Hammersoft. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Lock Martin, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:52, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Lock Martin, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Hammersoft (talk) 11:00, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't censorship as you claim. Wikipedia is not censored. The problem is your edit contains a number of claims, such as him being afflicted with giantism and getting jobs related to his height, that are being made without providing a reliable source to sustain the claim. Find a reliable source to support the claim and it can be in the article. Failing that, it won't. --Hammersoft (talk) 11:02, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Lock Martin, you may be blocked from editing. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want the article to have citations, you should delete the whole thing; since 2011 it has been labelled as needing citations throughout. You are just being pettish about my stuff, and disruptive in suddenly deleting added, valid information. If you want citations, be constructive and go find them; otherwise, you are just being the reason few people contribute anything worthwhile to Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:2950:3CD0:4477:7C16:B95C:5054 (talk • contribs)

I did try to find them. I couldn't. You can see my comments to this effect at Talk:Lock Martin. My removal of your addition to this article has nothing to do with being petty. I have no motivation of any kind to be petty to a random person on the Internet. It has everything to do with not allowing the addition of content that claims a person suffered from a disease when such a claim lacks reliable sourcing. As for Wikipedia being worthwhile, you are welcome to add reliably sourced content to Criticism of Wikipedia if you like. As for me supposedly hindering people, sorry but that's provably false. If you have any other questions or concerns, certainly let me know. I'll be happy to help. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 15:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He was 7'7" tall and known as "the gentle giant", but you cannot acknowledge (as he certainly did; all his performances were based on his height) the presence of gigantism? Perhaps you should read on that topic; or perhaps you need to see a shrink to understand why the term gigantism creeps you out so. And, definitely, your removing content and holding it hostage for a reversion war based solely upon your personal discomfort with any and all "claims [that] a person suffered from a disease" is a *motivation* for your behavior; you are not at all disturbed by anything else in the article that is unsourced, which is to say, all of what you have left there. Sick, sad, sorry; you get no respect from me, and no further help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:2950:3cd0:4477:7c16:b95c:5054 (talk • contribs)

Gigantism is a medical condition. A person can be tall and have gigantism, and a person can be tall and not have gigantism. Just because a person is tall does not mean they have gigantism. Him supposedly having gigantism is no more accurate than saying he had any other disease, unless a source is provided to support it. If you want to add it in, find a reliable source that supports the claim. As to your attempts to insult me; my apologies but the opinions of a random person on the Internet whom I've never met and never will have no effect upon me. However, it does have an effect on you. We have a policy regarding such behavior at Wikipedia:No personal attacks. If you persist in violating it, you will likely find yourself blocked for that as well. Your behavior reflects poorly on you, not on me. I am not responsible for your behavior. I do hope you are. --Hammersoft (talk) 10:53, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN/I discussion about your edits

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:2600:1700:2950:3CD0:4477:7C16:B95C:5054. Thank you. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 00:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.