User talk:RepublicanJones1952

RepublicanJones1952, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi RepublicanJones1952! 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 GoingBatty (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021

Hello, I'm Notfrompedro. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, CNN controversies, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Notfrompedro (talk) 18:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality and Reliable Sources

I would suggest reading our Neutral point of view which requires that any views expressed in an article must be supported by reliable sources. This brings me to my next point: Many sources have been discussed in the past and found to be "generally reliable" or "generally unreliable" not because of their political bias, but because they're known to publish false information without fact checking. There's a bit more nuance if you really want to get into it but a good rule of thumb is that if a source is colored red in the list at WP:RSP, you should either avoid using it altogether or be prepared to explain why it's appropriate to use in that particular instance. The NY Post (which you added here) is one of the most notorious ones and usually gets deleted on sight. RealClearPolitics and AllSides, which you added here, are questionable sources at best — And neither mentions "communism" or the "far left"! If you're going to add labels like those to an article like CNN, you'd better be sure the sources are A) reliable and B) actually support what you're saying. My suggestion to you would be to spend less time criticizing Wikipedia's perceived bias and more time finding good quality sources to back up your point of view. –dlthewave ☎ 12:55, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 17:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may not abuse talkpages to promote medical misinformation yourself. Acroterion (talk) 17:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notices

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 COVID-19, broadly construed. 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.

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-1992 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.

Acroterion (talk) 17:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

wp:soap

Note using terms like " DemocRATS" will not get you your way. Not is saying anyone is "psychotic".Slatersteven (talk) 16:49, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard discussion notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. –dlthewave ☎ 18:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

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 ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]