User talk:TopShelf99

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Acroterion (talk) 19:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 19:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I stated is factual, not defamatory. If you consider this problematic, it is mentioning the facts of what she and Brown did that you consider problematic. TopShelf99 (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What you said on the talkpage was clearly meant to be malicious. The relationship with Brown is mentioned in the article; your attempt at a misogynistic spin is the problem. Acroterion (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see MOS:CONTROVERSIAL & MOS:EDITORIAL. I think Objective3000's edit summary is enough said. Peaceray (talk) 21:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Kamala Harris for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestions were to improve the article, and giving it slightly less of a blatantly liberal slant. She WAS soundly defeated. That is factual, more neutral than what is written throughout the article, and a great deal more neutral and truthful than the defamatory language allowed in articles about Republican politicans. TopShelf99 (talk) 15:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this your final warning to focus on content and not on contributors. Your comment I can understand your disappointment about the election results and voters' repudiation of the damage Harris and Biden have caused for four years and what she stands for, but you and your fellow editors and administrators shouldn't let your liberal bias continue to influence Wikipedia articles. here is inappropriate and I will elevate your conduct to a noticeboard if it continues. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do what you need to do. It is clear that the Wikipedia editors and administrators have no desire for neutral, unbiased articles about Republicans or Democrats. I can't be the first person who has noticed this. TopShelf99 (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We recognize that the lead of Trump's article needs to be rewritten. There are constructive ways and nonconstructive ways to engage on that. Assailing editors is not the way, including your baseless claim about editors here on your talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]