User talk:Spdrcr19

December 2022

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Bill Hynes. All content for a living person must be reliably and independently sourced. Simply saying "X is not factual" and removing content that is sourced is not permitted. Zappa⚡Matic 20:46, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits lack facts and the same goes to you. They are poorly referenced or You have bad sources. Hynes is a disabled vet, honorably discharged. Hynes was a driver in the 25 Hour of thunder hill, race not just a crew chief. Hynes was cleared of allegations in the UFD matter. Spdrcr19 (talk) 21:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, all content must be cited to sources that are available and reliably sourced. If something is covered in a certain source that is considered reliable, that is what is used. If he mentions something in his podcast, that is what is used. If a news article discusses something, that is what is used. Just because you claim to know what the "truth" is does not mean it is verifiable. Zappa⚡Matic 21:31, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked your link for your source and it does not exist. So you have an unreliable source. and you are selectively writing your version of snippet. Remove the material you wrote that has no link to a source Spdrcr19 (talk) 21:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As explained in my edit summary, the article is to the York Daily Record, which requires a subscription to read. If you have one, you can access it. In the meantime, someone posted a mirror that is freely available to read on this forum. Zappa⚡Matic 21:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am talking about the thrillcast you mention that link does not work. Can you place a valid link Spdrcr19 (talk) 22:21, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If a link no longer works (i.e. it is deleted or the site is down), Wikipedia has processes to ensure a link is archived. For example, the cited ThrillCast episode appears to be taken down but the Wayback Machine has a mirror, while the episode remains available on Facebook. Zappa⚡Matic 23:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Hello, I'm Xeverything11. I noticed that you recently removed content from Bill Hynes without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Xeverything11 (talk) 07:27, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Previous poster vandalized the page with non factual information and no source. Spdrcr19 (talk) 07:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Bill Hynes, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you would like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 07:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valid reason was given. Spdrcr19 (talk) 07:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valid reason was given. Please don’t revert changes without having proper sources. You keep vandalizing the page and will be reported Spdrcr19 (talk) 07:36, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bill Hynes. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The I am Ben is posting false Information with no sources he has some unhealthy obsession to spread lies with no sources. Spdrcr19 (talk) 08:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Further. The content removal was fully explained. It’s unsourced and non factual information. Spdrcr19 (talk) 08:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss it on the talk page, do not continue edit warring. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HE should discuss it on the talk page and provide an actual source. He did not. He refuses. He should be reported for edit warring. Not me. All I did was keep the page from being vandalized. I will report you for helping this person to vandalize the page as well Spdrcr19 (talk) 08:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You will more than likely be blocked if you do not self-revert your most recent removal of reliably sourced content. Please self-revert and explain your point of view on the talk page. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:20, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Spdrcr19 reported by User:FormalDude (Result: ). Thank you. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained this a million times. You can’t say he was found guilty. He wasn’t. It’s not a factual statement and it is indeed misleading and their is not a source to such thing. Im ben online should put on the talk pages a source that says such a thing. You can’t post lies and a source that doesn’t corroborate the edit Spdrcr19 (talk) 08:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Bill Hynes) for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Wikipedia defines vandalism at WP:VAND. Please stop threatening to report people for vandalism for making good-faith edits, which includes reverting your deletions of content. You have already been temp blocked from editing Bill Hynes, and are at risk of being indefinitely blocked from editing any articles or Talk pages. David notMD (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]