User talk:Cpurick

Welcome!

Hello, Cpurick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 16:41, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Post-1932 politics of the United States

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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

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.

Drmies (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Hunter Biden. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter Biden

I noticed your comment at Talk:Hunter Biden (diff) where you made a claim about a living person without providing a reliable source. Do you have any evidence to support that claim? If so, please post it immediately (before making any further edits). If not, please remove it immediately. Note that at Wikipedia, even on a talk page, "evidence" means a reliable source—not one of the many anything-goes websites. I make this request as an uninvolved adminstrator. Johnuniq (talk) 04:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AP discretionary sanctions alert

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 post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

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.

(These expire after 12 months so another reminder is needed.) Johnuniq (talk) 05:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Disruption." That's funny. The truth is "disruption." You people really are living in 1984, aren't you?

(Redacted) Is Reuters reputable enough, Scum?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hunter-biden-ukraine-idUSKBN1WX1P7 Cpurick (talk) 15:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Johnuniq (talk) 23:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I redacted the WP:BLP violations above. Please do not use any page at Wikipedia to denigrate living people. If this were a relevant article talk page, it would be fine to make a constructive comment proposing an improvement to the article, with a reliable source to back any claim. However, evidence-free accusations are not permitted at Wikipedia. Johnuniq (talk) 23:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I attached the citation, you lying liberal fuck.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hunter-biden-ukraine-idUSKBN1WX1P7 Cpurick (talk) 23:37, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've extended the duration of the block to indefinite, based on the responses above. This project doesn't seem like a great fit for you, to put it mildly, but you are welcome to appeal the block by the means described here. MastCell ^Talk 01:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, you're trying to punish me. In twenty minutes I'll have another ID and I'll be able to edit whatever I want.

Seriously, who do you people think you are? Cpurick (talk) 01:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

— Newslinger talk 02:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]