User talk:76.126.172.88

Welcome!

Hello! I noticed your contributions to 2024 United States Senate election in West Virginia and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Marquardtika (talk) 17:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hello. Thanks for your appropriate, well thought out, and well summarized edit to Cooley Law School. By the way, you can only could be identified by the your IP address, many IP addresses change periodically and are often shared by several users. As an IP user, you may wish to create an account to log in and to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. Regards, Quaerens-veritatem (talk) 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Your recent editing history at Bernie Moreno shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. BBQboffin^{grill me} 00:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBQ boffin has stated no legitimate reason for factual material--things that actually happened--that is supported by two citations, other than that the user does not like those facts. 76.126.172.88 (talk) 00:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBQ boffin has stated no legitimate reason for the deletion of the factual material--things that actually happened--that is supported by two citations, other than that the user does not like those facts. 76.126.172.88 (talk) 00:14, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion on the article's talk page, where you, me, and other editors can comment and reach consensus, following WP:BRD in a WP:CIVIL manner about the article wording and the citation quality (your NPR source is solid, the other one is of dubious reliability). BBQboffin^{grill me} 00:21, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not attempting to reach a consensus on anything. You're simply deleting large chunks of factual content, supported with multiple citations, because you don't like those facts. You personally deciding what gets to stay in an article is not consensus building. 76.126.172.88 (talk) 02:44, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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.

BBQboffin^{grill me} 04:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia"

This is good advice for BBQ boffin, who simply deletes large chunks of factual content. To be clear, providing content on a page, with a citation, that describes something that actually occurred--facts that are beyond dispute--is exactly consistent with the purposes of Wikipedia. BBQ boffin selectively decides what content that user wants to have on a page, and deletes the rest, veracity and citations be damned. 76.126.172.88 (talk) 05:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did delete content and your non-RS source here and then again when you used Breitbart as a reference here. I suggest you review the various policies about WP:RS, WP:CIVIL, and WP:AGF as a less gracious editor would justifiably be posting warning templates and calling you to be blocked by now. Let's focus on content (politics is not the best subject area to edit if one cannot do it objectively and disapassionately) and build a great encyclopedia together. Cheers! BBQboffin^{grill me} 17:24, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please, focus on making a great encyclopedia, which presents the total factual record, and stop making executive decisions on what sort of facts people should have access to. Also, if you're going to correct someone's grammar, make sure it's actually necessary, otherwise you are contributing nothing. 76.126.172.88 (talk) 17:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.