User talk:8675309

?!

Welcome!

Hello, 8675309, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

October 2018

Hello, I'm DBigXray. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Jamal Khashoggi, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DBig Xrayᗙ 01:51, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source is reliable as per WP:IRS. 8675309 (talk) 02:31, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Jamal Khashoggi, 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. DBig Xrayᗙ 02:18, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source is reliable as per WP:IRS. 8675309 (talk) 02:32, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Jamal Khashoggi. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:29, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Jamal Khashoggi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. DBig Xrayᗙ 02:32, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The source is reliable as per WP:IRS. 8675309 (talk) 14:04, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 8675309. You have new messages at Talk:Jamal_Khashoggi#Addition_of_propagandist_with_questionable_source.
Message added 02:42, 29 October 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DBig Xrayᗙ 02:42, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 8675309. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 8675309. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

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 recently shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. 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 any 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.

Icewhiz (talk) 08:52, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

- Mr X 🖋 11:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edit

Please read wp:minor, your edit to Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections was not a minor edit.Slatersteven (talk) 09:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely correct. 8675309 (talk) 22:37, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

You are aware of the discretionary sanctions around post-1932 American politics. Today you have added incorrect and badly sourced content to List of conspiracy theories. If you do this again you may be topic banned form this area. Guy (Help!) 01:22, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Mueller Report is a bad source? Are you saying Mueller is lying? That would be a surprise. 8675309 (talk) 05:42, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say making false claims about what the Mueller Report says would be a bad idea. --Calton | Talk 15:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quit beating around the bush. What specifically are you referring to, that I wrote, but you think is not in the Mueller Report? 8675309 (talk) 09:19, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of conspiracy theories, you may be blocked from editing. Guy (help!) 22:02, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You urgently need to understand the difference between a warning from an established editor and "harassment". Guy (help!) 23:15, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of conspiracy theories. Guy (help!) 19:09, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The claims about Crowdstrike not providing any evidence of a hack to the FBI are backed by recent court documents and Comey's testimony before congress.8675309 (talk) 05:28, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:SYN. Guy (help!) 08:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try pal. My sources are valid and my claims are substantiated. I am not engaging in original research as all claims are published by respectable journalistic sources. 8675309 (talk) 21:51, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

8675309, keep your discussion regarding Wikipedia content only at appropriate Talk pages, in this case only at Talk:List of conspiracy theories. Other editors may not see your comments if you don't. Stay on content Talk pages, it is there were discussion is consolidated. X1\ (talk) 22:08, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. However I didn't start this thread here. I responded to an editor after three messages were left. 8675309 (talk) 22:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Guy (help!) 12:56, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Guy (help!) 13:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

None of the edits listed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents have anything to do with my account. Not sure why they were associated with me. I only edit with a user name.8675309 (talk) 23:05, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/8675309. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 20:42, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]