User talk:Younggoldchip

Welcome!

Hello, Younggoldchip, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- The Red Pen of Doom 22:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sally Hemings

I reverted your additions to Sally Hemings because they were unsourced opinions, and were not written in a formal, encyclopedic tone.[1] We all have opinions, but our job at Wikipedia is to report on what reliable sources say, not on what we think. See WP:V for information on the Verifiability policy. Will Beback talk 21:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl FAC

You are receiving this notice because you have commented or contributed to the article previously. Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl is currently undergoing a Featured Article Candidate review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl/archive1. I would invite anyone interested in going by, looking at the article, and if inclined, adding your comments. Regards. GregJackP Boomer! 19:55, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher McCandless

Talk:Christopher_McCandless#Why_The_Ferocious_Abuse_of_This_Gentle_Soul.3F

Talk pages are for the improvement of the articles and consist of specific suggestions. They are not general forums to discuss the subject. See WP:NOTAFORUM. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 13:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel Dolezal

I've removed your comments from the Rachel Dolezal talk page because of WP:NOTFORUM and you are not here to help. If you post there again, I'll block you for disruptive editing. Your posts amount to trolling. You have been advised about these principles on your talk page and in this thread. Your last edit to an article was to remove cited info and you were reverted. Your article contributions in almost eleven years amounts to this so we aren't talking about article content because you aren't there to add any. I doubt that you know how to form a citation and I see that you don't really bring sources to the talk pages. You haven't been helping. For you to comment on any other talk page for an article, you'll need to cite published works and give page numbers.

Your last comment is trolling and unwelcome. You casting aspersions on the article writers such as this and this means that you can keep your opinions to yourself.

If you poke this grizzly again, you'll find out that I bite.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 00:56, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Berean Hunter, you're not a grizzly, nor are you a defender of Wikipedia standards of posting. You're possibly a bully who dislikes being disagreed with. That said, I've thought for some time that I should begin to provide citations, since I have them. Thank you for the reminder. I'd stubbornly thought for some years that because Wikipedia's shoulders are broad (or should be), the site could and should tolerate some discussion. Also, the reverting of POV comments seems to be inconsistent. Would somebody please do something, for example, about the endless and tireless debates about Peter O' Toole's nationality? And many other debates like it? Apply the Wikipedia standards equally for all. Another thing. Wikipedia editors and other users are urged to show civility. Of course that means you, as well. Insulting messages to commenters does not show good will. They don't deserve it, especially when they're very well read and have excellent memories. They have something to contribute. Youngthatgoldchip (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are trying to suggest that I'm the one who was uncivil when you decided to call me a "piteously insecure poster" and a "worried little person"? You were the one who was uncivil, insulting and cast that stone by name calling. I didn't do that in my post above to you. You seem to still want to do that by alluding to me as a bully. You also haven't read the situation correctly because I haven't taken a position of disagreeing with you about Dolezal. You came to that talk page with personal opinions, no citations and no suggestions for how to improve the article. In light of that, your comments were strictly argumentative and #3 and #4 of WP:NOTFORUM applies. I removed them and cited NOTFORUM twice in my edit summaries. Contrary to your claims that I might be a bully, I took no action against you until you stooped to being uncivil and disruptive with your third post. I looked at your previous interactions and warnings concerning NOTFORUM and saw that you were "stubbornly" ignoring them as you indicate above. Being well read and having an excellent memory have nothing to do with it. You are right that insulting messages to others does not show good will...so make sure that you don't do it any more, please.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Berean Hunter, I regret the harsh language on my part, when I discovered that my posts had been "disappeared" without explanation. A calm citing of the rules would have helped me here. I notice in your last post that "suggestions for how to improve the article" are acceptable. I will do that. Thank you. Younggoldchip (talk) 13:22, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]