User talk:CharlesShirley/Archives/2021/January

Sockpuppet investigation

You have been mentioned here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/NazariyKaminski Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021

Hello, I'm Purplebackpack89. 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 Lauren Boebert 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. You are clearly trying to edit the article to downplay Boebert's support for far-right organizations. pbp 00:17, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Ha. Ha. You are pretending that you are some kind of superior or something. Very funny. But not in an intentional way. - CharlesShirley (talk) 15:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

This does not surprise me at all Purplebackpack89. My own experience with Mr Shirley is under the guise of adherence to the "basic rules of Wikipedia" he edits out anything he comes across not in sync with his extremist far right pro-Trump POV. Honestly it would not suprise me if the dude took part in the recent insurrectionist riot at the US Captiol, but I do not know that he did or didnt I must say, so I am not accusing just saying it would not surprise me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.13.227.173 (talk) 13:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Ha. Ha. You are an IP editor refusing to come out in the sunshine of transparency by creating an account and exposing yourself to accountability. You are a coward, hiding in the shadows.. You are probably a sockpuppet of some editor who keeps making BLP violating edits to the Boebert article. Also, your comment is not only against Wikipedia rules, but it seems to be defamation of character. Your lies about me will not stop me from editing. - CharlesShirley (talk) 15:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

The IP is correct. You're also perverting BLP by making claims that sources don't exist when they do. Furthermore, the way you react to criticism is deplorable. pbp 16:54, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I can't take credit for helping whoever is butting heads with you about far right Trump fanatic Lauren Boebert, but good on them for trying to bring the truth about her to light. Bummer you got banned but As ye sow, so ye reap. Where did we hear that?

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement topic ban

The following topic ban now applies to you:

You are indefinitely topic banned from all pages and discussions related to post-1932 American politics, broadly construed.

You have been sanctioned for long-time persistent tendentious editing in the area in question, plus personal attacks and aspersions related to the area. Examples: systematically thinning out/outright removing negative material on Lauren Boebert on 13 January 2021; watering-down and whitewashing negative material at Kimberly Klacik, here; whitewashing Chris Jacobs (politician) (these are at this moment your very latest edits); and aspersions against Praxicidae in this ANI thread, with no evidence despite repeated requests.

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.

If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Bishonen | tålk 20:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Wow, ban violation already

This violates your topic ban as detailed above. Did you read it? Did you not understand it? Please go to WP:TBAN and read that, it gives a clear and concise explanation. Most admins block for the first violation, but I generally prefer to assume that there has been some misunderstanding. However, if you do it again, you will be blocked. Bishonen | tålk 22:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC).

As the first edit came just 6 minutes after the topic ban was dropped, it's possible Charles had hit "edit" before the ban notification showed up. If so, I wouldn't begrudge them the follow-up 4 byte "fix" edit. ~Awilley (talk) 02:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Archiving

Do you realise that your talk page threads are being archived 7 hours after the last entry? If you want 7 days, you need to use |age=168. I think seven hours is too short for other editors to engage in meaningful communication with you, and I'd like you to increase it to a sensible amount, please. --RexxS (talk) 00:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Archiving

Do you realise that your talk page threads are being archived 7 hours after the last entry? If you want 7 days, you need to use |age=168. I think seven hours is too short for other editors to engage in meaningful communication with you, and I'd like you to increase it to a sensible amount, please. --RexxS (talk) 00:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

[Update]: I've made the fix for you, as my message was clearly not received. --RexxS (talk) 15:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC)