User talk:J390

Hello, J390, and

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Glenn Beck. Thank you. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You make it look like I said something POV. I just said he was opposed to illegal immigration. How is that controversial? J390 (talk) 06:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:02, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop adding categories to articles about living people if there is no sourced material in the article to support the category. Please go back and revert any recent additions you have made to articles that are not verified within the article by reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:44, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

None of my additions were untrue, and were well known to boot. If we can put

conspiracy theorist category, of course we can put O'Donnell, Van Jones, Wright, Farrakhan, and Malloy for their advancement of theories about 9/11 or AIDS, many times being central to their biography. J390 (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

if you are here

most reputable sourcing. WND fails spectacularly in "having a reputation for fact checking and accuracy". You will need to find other sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

It was a true account regardless of what you think about their other stuff. If DemocraticUnderground posted a true account of something, I'd link to them too. J390 (talk) 22:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia requires

reliable sources, not claims of "truth". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Wikipedia doesn't discriminate between sources as long as they're verifying something that actually happened. Regardless of rather it's WND, MediaMatters, our sources don't have to be neutral. J390 (talk) 23:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia

about living people requires the HIGHEST level of reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

What are the definition of reliable sources? There's always going to be somebody saying one source or another is unreliable. J390 (talk) 23:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

if you are too lazy to read the links to the Wikipedia definitions of reliable sources that I have included in every posting on this page then I am through attempting to discuss with you. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion and speculation are one thing, documented facts are another. If you have a problem with my additions then I dare and urge you to remove the conspiracy theorist category and the Media Matters links from the Glenn Beck article. J390 (talk) 02:56, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use that article to make a

talk) 09:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

The CSMonitor has a clear slant too in the opposite direction. Why would they be a reputable source but not WND? Besides, Van Jones, O'Donnell, Wright, and Malloy believe in clandestine conspiracies if that's supposed to be the justification. "A commonly used shortcut to this page is WP:POINT. However, just because someone is making a point does not mean that s/he is disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate it. As a rule, one engaging in "POINTY" behavior is making edits which s/he does not really agree with, for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition." J390 (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing the category. It's clear you don't agree with our policy on sources, but trying to edit this way is non-productive and may get you taken to ANI.

With all respect to you, it was a pretty well covered online scandal about Corzine's actions at the World Bank he was widely criticized for. You talk about me adding "misleading or inaccurate information". What's misleading and inaccurate information is claiming Obama or Corzine are at all libertarian. It's been widely demonstrated Obama is anything but. That's objective. J390 (talk) 20:44, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to the "embezzling" comment in the edit summary. The

WP:BLP. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, J390. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, J390. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, J390. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of American conservatives, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 07:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

Battle of Dongola (1276), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its

grading scheme

to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Rusalkii (talk) 05:34, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Jewish states and dynasties § Did attempts to change POV in this list go too far & make it more biased?. Peaceray (talk) 00:05, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of battles 301–1300, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Lake Huleh.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]