User talk:45.62.219.78

June 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Maxine Waters. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 20:12, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Hello, I'm Jim1138. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Christopher Cantwell seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 07:45, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Steeletrap. 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. Jim1138 (talk) 07:45, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Christopher Cantwell, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Christopher Cantwell. Jim1138 (talk) 18:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did not insert any commentary. You are the one inserting commentary and quoting left-wing tabloids 45.62.219.78 (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Contact the sources of this "slander" Wikipedia is simply reporting on what the sources state. Jim1138 (talk) 18:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Christopher Cantwell

Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! Orphan Wiki 21:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Christopher Cantwell. 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. 331dot (talk) 21:11, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 21:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Acroterion: Hey man, I cited my sources, it's freaking court document, so I think that's credible enough. You "Wikipedia insiders" acting high and mighty are fast to prevent defamation of left-wing political figures, but have 0 concern for the defamation of right-wing political figures (see discussion above re. Chris Cantwell). This website is supposed to be free, neutral, and belonging to everyone. You people have infiltrated it and turned it into another propaganda organ. 45.62.219.78 (talk) 21:55, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You cited an openly partisan source. If mainstream publications pick up on it on a large scale, that will be different, but even then it must achieve consensus for inclusion. Until then, a partisan source quoting court documents (which are not themselves usable as sources on Wikipedia because court documents often contain unsubstantiated allegations) violates the biographies of living persons policy. Acroterion (talk) 22:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.