User talk:Wcmcdade

I know it's annoying, but the New York Times thing really isn't helping get the DM block removed

I get angry at the way the debate around the DM is so illogical and filled with prejudice as well, but the New York Times thing isn't helping, and may get you banned. Best take a chill pill. Even if the vote goes against unblocking the DM we've put a pretty good peg in the ground for having another debate on this in six months which we have every chance of winning. Keep your powder dry for that. FOARP (talk) 20:25, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thatnk you for the feedback FOARP. This is NOT about the Daily Mail. This is only about the NYT. The DM is a whole separate issue for me.

May 2019

Hey Ahrtoodeetoo, Please go ahead and tell mommy you’re upset. PLEASE REPORT ME. It would be a badge of honor to have the “Democratic Party version of truth (Wikipedia - English Language)” boot me after 10 years because you and they are afraid of me opening an RfC on a talk page.

It is absolutely ridiculous that we can’t have a discussion on a talk page because some people disagree with my question (see the inaccurately title article “Spygate (conspiracy theory)”173.54.120.246 (talk) 18:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken you up on your request and posted a note at User talk:Awilley. Let's see how he responds. R2 (bleep) 18:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic banned for a period of 3 months from editing anything related to post-1932 American Politics

You have been sanctioned for disruptive and editing

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ~Awilley (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please take some time to read WP:TOPICBAN to understand what this means. Violations of the topic ban will result in your account from being blocked from editing. Also, I recommend that you spend some time editing less-controversial areas. Wikipedia isn't meant to be a battleground, and we have less patience with editors who exclusively edit hot-button issues. ~Awilley (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But no thanks. Requesting an RfC on a page called “SpyGate (conspiracy theory)” that appears to be edited by the children’s Democratic Party coalition and then getting “sanctioned” by some sanctimonious editor who doesn’t even explain what he finds to be so aweful is enough for me to finally realize that Wikipedia has completely lost its way. I’m deleting/deactivating my account. There’s no reason whatsoever for a person who’s not interest in echoing Democratic Party half truths and outright lies to continue to try to respectfully participate on a site where they believe the Daily Mail isn’t a reliable source, but the laughable N.Y. Times and Washington Post are. In 1989 the Post and Times were simply partisan. In 2019 they’ve become Democratic Party Propaganda machines. Good-byeWcmcdade (talk) 03:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]