User talk:Jasonbourne033

June 2018

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Mexican Drug War with this edit that didn't seem very civil, so I removed it. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 10:07, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Ignorant libtards"? If that's your attitude, I would suggest finding another outlet.
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Mexican Drug War. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 10:14, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The illegal flow of weapons from the private hands of US citizens and gun shops into Mexico is extremely well documented, investigated, researched and published by a large number of reliable references. Although these guns are purchased legally, there is a vast amount of straw purchases and then they are transferred ownership illegally (straw purchase) to be smuggled into Mexico. The most powerful evidence came from the Federal government itself through their own ATF experiment called Project Gunrunner, aka: ATF gunwalking scandal. The serial numbers of the guns were traced. So this is not a Wikipedia conspiracy as you imply, nor Jim1138's POV, but a fact supported by plenty of reliable references from the media and from the US Government. Rowan Forest (talk) 14:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rowan Forest: I noticed your "note on the desk" at the adminboard, (without notifying me, by the way) accusing me of vandalism and "extreme hostility." The WikiMafia has struck again. I was actually somewhat surprised and amused by how fast you all reacted. Keep protecting the 'Wikipedia' and its indoctrinated readership from a factual POV.

The edits I made consisted of removing poorly sourced and factually incorrect statements. If you have a source for that material, add it instead of edit warring. I attempted to discuss the problem, but this Jim fellow kept deleting the threads. He also went into my contrib history to revert any edits not in line with his and the Wikipedias ideology. Edits such as those factually reporting on an author's published writings.

On a personal level, I would invite you to consider the fact that the media and the modern "US government" aren't reliable.

But hey, if you have a source, quit avoiding the issue and making false accusations and add it. Jasonbourne033 (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Child

I undid your edit as it was unsourced. See wp:V. Also it appeared to contain wp:original research Jim1138 (talk) 10:30, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican Drug War

The content there is well sourced and supports the article. If you disagree, take it to: talk:Mexican Drug War. See wp:BRD Jim1138 (talk) 10:31, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Lee Child, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 10:45, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This In the novel Die Trying, Child expresses a deep bias against US militia groups, slating the "Montana Militia... is wp:original research. Find a published wp:secondary source that states that and cite it. Jim1138 (talk) 10:47, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make a personal attack, as you did with this edit to User talk:Jim1138. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Jim1138 (talk) 11:07, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ani

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:59, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you are aware of the thread there. You might want to respond there. Might not. Up to you.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've somehow mistaken Wikipedia (which is an encyclopedia) with "a bullshit internet site" [1] therefore I've blocked you so your confusion doesn't disrupt the work of editors working on the encyclopedia. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]