User talk:Freethinker6799

Feminism interference to Johnny Depp Case

A talk on the incident and its consequences

June 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jessica_Taylor_(author). 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) 14:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be summarized, I had done editions to three different article then a little after that you removed all three, how could it be understand except an edit war? I didn't do anything except for adding what I thought it should be there. Then, how you could left here a comment about edit war and threaten me about block?

Furthermore, as to Taylor page, if you think that thing didn't happened and thosefour international news pages I added are false please bring here you proofs.

Also Wikipedia isnt for promote individual nor a board for job advertisments, thevway you do it's like Wikipedia us for promotion. Freethinker6799 (talk) 18:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Generalrelative (talk) 14:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are in a paranoid state, as you think I'm in edit war. Perhaps you forgotthat you tracked all my edition in three different article and removed it that you should know isn't appropriate. Why should you track down my activities and undone it?

And after that you commentrd I started an edit war? How rude and allusional you should be?

I added something that really happened I saw by my eyes, there's even original tweets in tweeter, how it is of disput-inclined? Freethinker6799 (talk) 18:15, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Jessica Taylor (author) while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Generalrelative (talk) 19:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalrelative don't know what you're talking about but would be appreciated if you stop threatening. instead of these warning which doesn't make sense respond what I put on your page. or let's carry it to a board. because your threatenings really bother me. Freethinker6799 (talk) 19:45, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you claiming that this edit was not you? Generalrelative (talk) 20:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalrelative ok, after threatenings now it's time for police work. I've the android app and also using the web, don't know. is this part of WP policy that let you to intrigue people? as well as, how could it be related to the dispute? we're talking about something with sources which you removed, about tracking down my activities and removed them more than once, about your mentality on Wikipedia that see it like a advertising space. try to resolve this dispute. Freethinker6799 (talk) 20:16, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3O decline

I have declined your request for a third opinion, as you failed to provide a link to any Talk page demonstrating that there was any significant discussion of the content under dispute (note that 3O is not for resolving behavioral matters). If you wish to re-file with an appropriate link, please read the instructions at 3O carefully before doing so, as your filing was significantly malformed (for instance, it was not neutrally phrased nor was it a brief description of the dispute). Otherwise, you're welcome to pursue other forms of dispute resolution. DonIago (talk) 02:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago The user didn't respond just saying sources unreliable which are reliable. I'm tired of that. is there anyone help with that? that's first time it happens to me don't know what should I do? Freethinker6799 (talk) 02:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you raised the question at the article's Talk page, and asked for assistance from any related WikiProjects? If not, that's pretty much Step One. You need to lay out your concerns in a place where other editors can see them and weigh in. Edit summaries are not a substitute for discussion. DonIago (talk) 02:16, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago now I put it on the talk page, just now I realized that user: generalrelative removed my notice on their talk page. that's interesting. Freethinker6799 (talk) 02:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago that's good point I'll do so. thanks. Freethinker6799 (talk) 02:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editors have pretty broad discretion at to what they can remove from their own Talk pages (see WP:BLANKING). Removing a message is pretty much "read and understood" with the obvious implication that they're not interested in engaging. DonIago (talk) 02:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Generalrelative when get deleted all my comments on your talk page, and pretend I'm not into discussion just is immature conduct, it's not right, not fair, not in good faith. also before accusing people to edit warring should have in your mind what is edit warring. By the way, in your talk page history all is documented that you called my comments "garbage" without any answer deleted. I'm not into any nonsense edit warring but that page should be neutral, without any promotion, advertising tone. Plus I've filed a few tries for third opinion and resolution disputes but as I've not been in such situation before couldn't do it very well . I'm going to ask a few impartial opinions for intervention.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freethinker6799 (talk • contribs)

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Jessica Taylor (author), have removed content without a good reason to do so. Content on Wikipedia should not be removed just because you disagree with it or because you think it's wrong, unless the claim is not verifiable. Instead, you should consider expanding the article with noteworthy and verifiable information of your own, citing reliable sources when you do so. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dr.Pinsky (talk) 19:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr.Pinsky hello. thanks for your advice.

also I'm not new, just lost my username & password on bad luck, however appreciate your kindness. basically I'm into expansion for articles,. no doubt. here is a problem which is I expanded the article you can see for yourself in the history cited daily mail etc, the user generalrelative removed them a couple of times based on unreliablity of sources sent me WP policy. I tried to discuss & solve the problem on the user talk page but the user deleted all them either, you can see for yourself. finally I said ok that's unreliable so it's also for guardian & independent etc. wouldn't accept it either. basically user tried to promote page. any neutral intervention appreciate by me Freethinker6799 (talk) 19:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Generalrelative (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ive left on your page messages you deleted them in "garbage" ground. Seems you have no code for behavior. You said daily mail isn't reliable, I accept and added also guardian independent aren't likewise. Be committed to your sayings. Freethinker6799 (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have on your page another warning do not delete it. Freethinker6799 (talk) Freethinker6799 (talk) 19:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please bear in mind that a user may remove warnings and messages left on their own talk page, but the message is deemed to be read and acknowledged. A user who repeatedly re-adds deleted messages to a user's talk page is subject to blocking per WP:3RR, whether or not their contact of the user is deemed to be harassment. —C.Fred (talk) 20:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please keep your response in the same heading level. You do not need to create a new section with your response; it can (and should) be in a thread. —C.Fred (talk) 20:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]