User talk:Knowledge1253

Research was completed to verify statement about mayor. Reference to link was provided. A simple google search revealed verifiable content.

Quote below copy & pasted.

Wikipedia articles concerning living persons may include material—where relevant, properly weighted, and reliably sourced—about controversies or disputes in which the article subject has been involved. Wikipedia is not a forum provided for parties to off-wiki disputes to continue their hostilities. Experience has shown that misusing Wikipedia to perpetuate legal, political, social, literary, scholarly, or other disputes is harmful to the subjects of biographical articles, to other parties in the dispute, and to Wikipedia itself.

Therefore, an editor who is involved in a significant controversy or dispute with another individual—whether on- or off-wiki—or who is an avowed rival of that individual, should not edit that person's biography or other material about that person, given the potential conflict of interest. More generally, editors who have a strongly negative or positive view of the subject of a biographical article should be especially careful to edit that article neutrally, if they choose to edit it at all.[e]

December 2021

Hello, I'm Darren-M. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, McGarry, Ontario, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Darren-M talk 13:08, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please add the citation for me, Darren? I am a new user to Wikipedia. Clermont Lapointe was honoured by the town for his 36 years of service, and a newspaper write-up may be found on the internet if you need a source for your citation. Thank you.Knowledge1253 (talk) 21:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't add comments to the article. Use the article's talk page. And see Help:Introduction_to_referencing_with_Wiki_Markup/1 for an intro to referencing. Suggesting that we use ontario.ca as a ref is not useful. That's like pointing us to a book with thousands of pages but not telling us which page to look at. Meters (talk) 21:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

www.ontarioparks.com/cr/mcgarrytownshipforestconservationreserve Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:29, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

www.northernnews.ca/news/local-news/0801-vtown-clermont

Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did at McGarry, Ontario, you may be blocked from editing. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk • contribs) 23:06, January 3, 2022 (UTC)

Please tell me what the inappropriate link was, and why it was inappropriate, so I do not do it again. Tks! Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think I did any advertising or promotion, and search engine rankings are not a concern. Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed 'tagging'

To tag text as 'Citation needed', please use the {{Citation needed}} template. --220 of ^ßorg 12:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will learn. Thank you.

Knowledge1253 (talk) 12:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

you are no welcome to post on my talk page

After this [1] you are no welcome to post on my talk page unless the post is required by Wikipedia rules. Meters (talk) 06:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Go away. Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Knowledge1253 (talk) 12:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jan 22

You need to read wp:spa and wp:rightgreatwrongs, as well as wp:not.Slatersteven (talk) 11:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You also need to really read wp:npa.Slatersteven (talk) 11:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yoo also need to read wp:v and wp:cite.Slatersteven (talk) 12:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tks. & have a happy day n thank you for your pointers. Knowledge1253 (talk) 12:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you also read WP:BATTLEGROUND, as making demands of people will not go down well. We work by collaboration, which means you make a case at the articles talk page, not demands users do as you want.Slatersteven (talk) 14:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:51, 8 January 2022 (UTC) what did I demand of you Slaterseven? Do you give me need to demand you, because you do not acknowledge polite requests?[reply]

@Slatersteven thank you for your pointers. I click on some links, then words I don't know, and end up angry.Sorry for being rude. Because you are right, I am not demonstrating respectfully behaviour. And I WILL truly make an effort not to be snarky and snide. Knowledge1253 (talk) 10:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Meters. I have already told you to stay off my talk page, and you acknowledged that message. Do not post there again unless Wikipedia rules require it. Meters (talk) 07:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning from me, next time I take you to wp:ani. We are a collaborative effort, and you are supposed to treat users with respect. It is clear you have not read wp:npa or wp:not. You need to drop the wp:battleground mentality, and actually make valid policy-based arguments, and not resort to snark or snideness. We are WP:NOTDUMB and judge by actions and not WP:CPUSH.Slatersteven (talk) 13:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After this edit [2] , I have enough of this. You wrote on my talk page on how to get rid of User:Meters. I am an uninvolved user and you don't go to random talk pages, asking them how to stop *name of user* from deleting their content. Unless the user breached policy, as User:Slatersteven stated on my talk page, they have the right to undo your edits and revert to the previous version. You cannot post on other user talk pages on how to stop a user from deleting your content without proving the user did so. User talk pages are meant for users to give a message regarding their edits, not a tool that vandal can use, or to be abused in any way. In this case, you were writing about how to stop User:Meters from deleting your edits. A talk page is not a tool to be used by users to ask people how to stop a specific user from deleting their edits. The user has the right to undo any edit if it's unsourced or nonsense gibberish. ThereIsNoPeople (talk) 18:52, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:49, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Doing my best, learning from what I am shown. I think there is more Truthiness at Wikiality![reply]

Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)but tks for the convulated explanation about why meters can delete my edits, and I can do the same![reply]

Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)I get confused by all the different places and pages and talks and articles things are to be done. And all the links I am suggested to read. Very overwhelming. Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it can be. This is why it is best to start off not entering into edit wars, and when challenged let it ride and go to make less controversial edits until you find out how we do things.Slatersteven (talk) 10:50, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need to stop editing and actually read our policies. You keep adding unsourced or badly sourced content, which is wasting other user's time to check. This will eventually be seen as wp:disruptive if it goes on for too long.Slatersteven (talk) 11:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK enough, that is the second time in a few minutes you have added content that is sourced to something that does not support it, stop now. A source must say what you use it for, it must (for example) say that someone did something.Slatersteven (talk) 11:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is now your last warning, if you add one more cite I have to mark as unverified I will report you as disruptive. Stop now and make a case for your edits at talk.Slatersteven (talk) 11:30, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also I think you need to read wp:primary, as much of the material you have tried to add is sourced to primary sources.Slatersteven (talk) 12:03, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at McGarry, Ontario. Please stop. Your sources do not say that these rocks are sacred, and they do not say that the town was built there because of the rocks, as you seem to be implying. Meters (talk) 20:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not imply that. I do not know what you mean that I imply the town was built there for the rocks. They are erratic boulders, used as a signpost bu DesTroyes. Knowledge1253 (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Enough

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Slatersteven (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:05, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Knowledge1253 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

sources are reliable. Articles found in many newspapers. Knowledge1253 (talk) 04:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. It would help if you spoke in complete sentences and included enough context that someone can figure out what you're talking about. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

What are the results of the discussion @ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents @Slatersteven Knowledge1253 (talk) 17:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Knowledge1253 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

the edits I make have primary, verifiable sources. The content that is being deleted regarding the sacred site and standing stones is from a university professor. Beaverhouse First Nation link keeps getting deleted, Chief Tonene links get deleted, Pearl Beach sacred site and standing stone info gets deleted. Info on Beaverhouse Land Claim gets deleted. Knowledge1253 (talk) 10:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You seem to think primary sources are good. Primary sources are, in general, inappropriate. Please reread WP:RS. Yamla (talk) 10:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Reliable source https://www.baytoday.ca/local-news/northern-ontario-stonehenge-mysterious-boulders-explored-on-the-back-roads-3631836

Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a reliable source? Thank you in advance for reply. https://interestingcanadianhistory.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/stonehenge-ontario/Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All I need is one verifiable, reliable source in order not to be deleted. Is this one?https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/northern-ontario-glacial-droppings-leftover-from-shrinking-ice-sheets-1.3129601

Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)And I think the dictionary source for Chief Tonene is reliable, so do not understand why it gets deleted.Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Like members of a small community, these “Stonehenge” rocks are well known to the residents of Larder Lake, situated across the water body of the same name on the northeast shore near the Big Narrows." https://www.sootoday.com/columns/back-roads-bill/northern-ontario-stonehenge-mysterious-boulders-explored-on-the-back-roads-3633219 article mentions narrows and stones.!Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:53, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I misused primary word for reliable. My sources meet the parameters for online inclusion. Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please review my block. Knowledge1253 (talk) 11:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possible socking

An IP has now made [3] one of the same improperly sourced edits to McGarry, Ontario that Knowledge1253 made. Meters (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please include for inclusion on McGarry page

Beaverhouse First Nation Community (Treaty 9)

Location: Northeast of Kirkland Lake Claim type: Reserve Land

Beaverhouse First Nation Community submitted a claim to Ontario on July 5, 2018, asserting the community is a distinct First Nation and did not sign Treaty 9, or any other treaty. On April 18, 2019, Ontario advised Beaverhouse First Nation Community that it will complete an assessment of the claim submission within three years.

https://www.ontario.ca/page/current-land-claims Knowledge1253 (talk) 17:40, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi meters!

Beaverhouse First Nation Community (Treaty 9)

Location: Northeast of Kirkland Lake Claim type: Reserve Land

Beaverhouse First Nation Community submitted a claim to Ontario on July 5, 2018, asserting the community is a distinct First Nation and did not sign Treaty 9, or any other treaty. On April 18, 2019, Ontario advised Beaverhouse First Nation Community that it will complete an assessment of the claim submission within three years.

https://www.ontario.ca/page/current-land-claims Knowledge1253 (talk) 17:39, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please include for inclusion on McGarry, Ontario page.

Knowledge1253 (talk) 17:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops forgot my tildesKnowledge1253 (talk) 17:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]