User talk:Patriotmouse

Welcome!

Hello, Patriotmouse, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Julietdeltalima (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:28, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Patriotmouse, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Patriotmouse! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:04, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Patriotmouse, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to H-1B visa have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:26, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Neural Cube

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Neural Cube, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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. Cryptic Canadian 04:10, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Noonean Cybernetics

The article Noonean Cybernetics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG, possible hoax.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cryptic Canadian 04:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at The Great Replacement, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gain consensus on the article's talk page before creating this badly sourced WP:POVFORK. Grayfell (talk) 20:42, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at The Great Replacement. Grayfell (talk) 20:48, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to shame me isn't going to work, and personal attacks can get you blocked. If you want to know why the Kalergi thing is not considered legitimate, this guy explains it pretty well. I'm not saying he's right, but it still explains why it's not taken seriously. That video is not a reliable source for Wikipedia by the way, it's just an example of a different perspective. I'm offering it in the hope that you find it useful. Grayfell (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the block to indefinite, based on clear-cut holocaust denial trolling here [1]. Acroterion (talk) 22:01, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Correcting unsupported facts is not "clear-cut holocaust denial trolling" To say trolling is a unitary left viewpoint which is anti-truth and anti-fact and anti-source based. To be very specific, the edit the blocker cited is that I changed "death camps" to "work camps" this is what the evidence supports. The camps were never created to cause death. Several documents support this claim including the fact that treatment of prisoners, to the point of specifying caloric requirements to keep prisoners in a good state of health were ordered by German leadership. Furthermore, until there is a clear definition of what exactly the "holocaust" is, declarming me a holocaust denier is patently absurd. The psychological extremism by the jewish armada who support the extremist view of what happened in world war two is entirely NOT fact based, it is anti-truth, and it is bordering on cult level of psychotism. Because I stand for truth and facts, I am declared a "troll" and that is patently absurd. It is the other side whose position cannot stand up to the light of truth and be discussed and any attempt to discuss the EVIDENCE they pale and seek to shut down free speech. Is this what Wikipedia stands for, how truly sad.

Decline reason:

You've been evading your block to continue your trolling. By the way, you have no "free speech" rights here; this is private website, not the U.S. government. If you want to continue your trolling, you'll have to find some other website. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2019 (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.

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.

Working at Wikipedia

Hello, Patriotmouse,

I think you have gradually discovered that Wikipedia is probably not the place for you to contribute. We are not interested in your point of view or opinions, just what reliable sources have to save about notable people and ideas. There are plenty of places, message boards, blogs, etc., where you can find common conversation with other people who you can debate about the issues that matter to you but Wikipedia is not the right place for this type of discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:47, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]