User talk:Onlyforwikiapps

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Onlyforwikiapps

A tag has been placed on User:Onlyforwikiapps requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Johnj1995 (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anti-Wikia Alliance for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anti-Wikia Alliance is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Wikia Alliance until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}.

Cullen328 (talk) 02:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328

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).

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

Request reason:

I apologize. i did not violate the 3 revision rule. I wont edit war again with this powerful administrator again. Please unblock me. thank you for your time. Onlyforwikiapps (talk) 03:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You don't have to violate WP:3RR to be determined to be edit warring; it is possible to edit war with fewer reverts. In at least one edit summary you say "I am in an edit war". You also seem intent on telling the world about your views as to the cause of a particular event- Wikipedia is the wrong place for that. I see no reason to remove the block early. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 15 February 2023 (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.

Regarding :

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACentral_Intelligence_Agency&diff=1139234427&oldid=1134701666

Talk:Central Intelligence Agency

==  Added - 2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage ==

In February 2023, American reporter Seymour Hersh reported that the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines had been carried out by the US Navy, the CIA, and the Norwegian Navy, under the direct order of President Biden. Hersh's report relied on an anonymous source who stated that, in June 2022, US Navy divers placed explosive C4 charges on the pipelines at strategic locations selected by the Norwegians. The source said that charges were placed under the cover of a multi-nation wargame simulation known as BALTOPS 22, and remotely detonated three months later by a signal from a sonar buoy dropped by a Norwegian P-8 surveillance plane.^[1]^[2]

Onlyforwikiapps (talk) 01:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears I am in an edit war with an admin over including this.

CIA, FBI computers used for Wikipedia edits AUGUST 17, 2007 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-security-wikipedia-idUSN1642896020070816 I am certain it is now contracted out, per the many leaks. Is this admin part of some organization. No. I did not say this. I am saying that I am in a edit war with an admin. Onlyforwikiapps (talk) 02:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you're edit-warring to insert credulously-phrased and undue fringe speculation, which has no place here. And stop with the silly "is this admin part of some organization" nonsense. Read WP:ONUS, and stop loading up edit summaries with the text. Acroterion (talk) 02:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

^ Midolo, Emanuele (February 8, 2023). "US bombed Nord Stream gas pipelines, claims investigative journalist Seymour Hersh". The Times. Retrieved February 8, 2023.
^ "White House Denies Seymour Hersh Report That U.S. Sabotaged Nord Stream Pipelines". Democracy Now!. February 9, 2023. Retrieved February 10, 2023.

[1] Midolo, Emanuele (February 8, 2023). "US bombed Nord Stream gas pipelines, claims investigative journalist Seymour Hersh". The Times. Retrieved February 8, 2023.

[2] "White House Denies Seymour Hersh Report That U.S. Sabotaged Nord Stream Pipelines". Democracy Now!. February 9, 2023. Retrieved February 10, 2023.

[1]

[2]