User talk:MahdDogg

Welcome!

Hello, MahdDogg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Beeblebrox (talk) 19:17, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Just letting you know about these.

In addition, please read WP:CIVIL and refrain from making personal attacks as you've done at Talk:Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose calling me a hateful bigot is okay though? I pointed out your vandalism and defamtory edits on living people's pages, that your "evidence" presented aren't reports but opinion pieces from biased sources. You have a clear axe to grind, and a deep and burning hatred that is very evident in your manipulation of wikipedia. MahdDogg (talk) 18:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to LGB Alliance, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 18:19, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't. I correctly removed a section that implies guilt by association based upon the address of the charitable organisation, and provided actual direct links to relevant materials that for some reason you decided doesn't count. Wikipedia is fast becoming a source of misinformation driven by ideology and not a place where truth lives. MahdDogg (talk) 18:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:41, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence do you have to back up this assertion? I'm making edits to improve the accuracy of the encyclopedia, yet your own admin staff are guilty of vandalism. This block is an intimidation act based on collusion between admins to push false information on this platform. MahdDogg (talk) 00:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]