User talk:Doandroidscountsheep

October 2021

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Missy Cummings. Thank you. clpo13_(talk) 23:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's true though. Doandroidscountsheep (talk) 23:03, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then you can surely find a source for it. clpo13_(talk) 23:04, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the time. If you want a source so badly, you find it. Doandroidscountsheep (talk) 23:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BURDEN; the editor adding a claim is considered responsible for substantiating it. Alternatively, think for a minute about the ramifications of a policy where anyone can add any old stuff to an article about a living person, and it stayed up until someone was able to find evidence of absence regarding the claim; it would be a complete disaster! jp×g 23:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Missy Cummings. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. jp×g 23:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm QRep2020. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Missy Cummings have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Please stop vandalizing the Missing Cummings article with unverified and derogatory statements. QRep2020 (talk) 23:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Missy Cummings

A self-compiled list of Tweets is not a reliable source per the policy on biography of living persons, and it certainly doesn't show that she's "known for" what you claim. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's rules. "Open source" does not meet you can add anything you like. ... discospinster _talk 00:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It also means that anyone can add information without fear of it being taken down for lack of knowledge of procedures and 'official' sources. I don't understand how her tweets aren't a reliable source - They're her exact words. Doandroidscountsheep (talk) 00:37, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your list of her Tweets is not a reliable source. The Tweets themselves are private so there is no way of knowing that what you wrote is accurate. And being critical of Tesla is not "biased against Tesla" except in your interpretation. ... discospinster _talk 01:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moot point now but linking to tweets and concluding bias is a case of original research. QRep2020 (talk) 11:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine I'll just make another account. Doandroidscountsheep (talk) 01:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We'll see whether that is effective. It is certainly prohibited and reduces your chance of being unblocked on appeal to 0. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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))

~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]