User talk:TheLawMan85

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page 2018 Brazilian general election, have removed content without a good reason to do so. Content on Wikipedia should not be removed just because you disagree with it or because you think it's wrong, unless the claim is not verifiable. Instead, you should consider expanding the article with noteworthy and verifiable information of your own, citing reliable sources when you do so. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! SlightlyToastedCheesecake (talk) 22:07, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Homophobic, racist, and misogynistic beliefs

Good morning. You’re right, those sources were less than optimal. I have gone ahead and found some better, more reliable sources, all of which mention either homophobia, racism, or misogyny. I hope these are more to your liking. SlightlyToastedCheesecake (talk) 04:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to 2024 United States presidential election in Georgia, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. as per WP:RSP: "There is no consensus as to RealClearPolitics's reliability. They appear to have the trappings of a reliable source, but their tactics in news reporting suggest they may be publishing non-factual or misleading information. Use as a source in a Wikipedia article should probably only be done with caution, and better yet should be avoided." JoshuaJ28 (talk) 05:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is why Wikipedia will always be viewed as a leftist rag piece. RCP was literally by far the most accurate polling aggregator in the last presidential election. But they can't be used now because leftist editors on here don't like that they're the most bullish on Trump. That is literally the only reason. This website is a damn joke. TheLawMan85 (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JoshuaJ28 (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• 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.

Elli (talk | contribs) 16:34, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3RR notice

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. Thank you. JoshuaJ28 (talk) 16:44, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right back at you buddy. You are in the wrong and have too big an ego to admit it. TheLawMan85 (talk) 16:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

TheLawMan85 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This is quite ridiculous actually. I posted RCP election polling aggregate data to the swing presidential election pages, as is already done in the Senate races, and User:JoshuaJ28 repeatedly reverted my edits, claiming RCP was unreliable by consensus. This is flatly false, so I reverted his reverts. If calling him a bot because he contradicted his own claim immediately after making it deserves an editing block, then this website is not worth its salt. He started this edit war, not me, so to say I disagree with the conclusion by User:Bbb23 that my edits were "disruptive" is a huge understatement. TheLawMan85 (talk) 17:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were both edit warring and making personal attacks. If you think this website isn't "worth its salt", because you desire to make personal attacks, then we don't need your contributions here. --jpgordon^𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 17:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.

 Elli (talk | contribs) 19:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]