User talk:MickTravisBickle

Welcome!

Hello, MickTravisBickle, 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 00:58, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Welcome![edit]

Hi MickTravisBickle! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! TagaworShah (talk) 21:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC) TagaworShah (talk) 21:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vivian Cash, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Magician. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023[edit]

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 Wi Spa controversy. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 21:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m quoting the same source that is quoted elsewhere. Just because it doesn’t put the registered sex offender in a favorable light does not mean it cannot be included. MickTravisBickle (talk) 21:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Camp Trans. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Can you ask someone else to step in please? Dana Rivers is part of the history of Mitch fast Trans . That’s the most famous members. Please. MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I am familiar with Wikipedia. They have no right to revert my edits. It’s one person against one. There is not a consensus of editors. I’m ready to talk when they are. MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the page history. Not one but three separate editors—one of whom happens to be an administrator—have reverted your edits. —C.Fred (talk) 02:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conveniently nobody has explained why. I would like to know why, because Dana Rivers was a very vocal member of camp. trans and she should be mentioned in the article. She murder to Mitchfest supporters. Can I create a separate article about those murders? MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see. Undue weight, coatracking, failure to get a consensus on the talk page before adding, tendentious writing, an unclear connection to the subject of the article, and unsourced content… I see plenty of explanations in the edit summaries. —C.Fred (talk) 02:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the entire article is a mess. There’s very few citations is formatted inmproperly. I show up with citations and at least some kind of formatting but suddenly that’s not OK? I’m very flummoxed as to why. Are you saying that she’s not germane to the article despite being the most visible in famous person associated with the event. She killed two people that she met there in cold blood and their child. How is that not relevant? MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I noticed was you citing press releases. I really think you should steer clear of BLP material until you have a better understanding of what kinds of sourcing and what kind of content we are looking for here. Drmies (talk) 02:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand but then why are non-professional news sites are being cited on the article ? Like Tumblr? If that’s the case, then there’s enough information in eyewitness accounts of people on similar non-professional new sites that could make a huge section about Rivers and her association with Camp trans/Mitchfest and murderers of the Reeds and their child. MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see any citations to Tumblr in the references of that article. The references to Scribd appear to be to the site where the copies of those years' programs from the event were kept—which is an allowed use of such a site. —C.Fred (talk) 02:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Tumblr isn't cited in the article. The Scribd citations are to archived copies of the programs for the relevant years of the event, though some of them are permanent dead links due to link rot and a lack of archived copies. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:58, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yet main stream acceptable source citations exist for Dana rivers, and Mitch fest and her huge platform in Camp Trans and the subsequent murders of two lesbians, who were involved with Mitch fest supporters. So I will include those. She will be included in the article as she should be. MickTravisBickle (talk) 03:05, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 Talk:Dana Rivers. You cannot describe a living person in the terms that you did anywhere on Wikipedia. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at Camp Trans, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What’s defamatory? Can you elaborate please. I’ve noted what you were saying. Don’t post about sourcing. I’ve also never been addressed like this on Wikipedia.

So I guess the consternation stems from the fact that you were telling me Dana Rivers was not a member of camp trans? She was listed as a member of camp trans on this page for years. Why did that suddenly change? Can you help me clarify please thanks.

Again. Dana Rivers never attended camp trans? MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again up until yesterday Dana Rivers and the Mitchfest connection were on Rivers’ main article. For years. No one saw to remove it. Curiously since I attempted to edit this truth into The Camp Trans article that reference suddenly vanishes as “poorly sourced”? I’m going to agree (for now) that there’s no solid documentation that links the murders to Mitchfest (though every original source, and eye witness, including the surviving child who wasn’t murdered in cold blood has stated as such) I understand that with no documentation from “the guardian” or the “Washington post” that it can’t be connected in the main Rivers article or the camp trans article.

However, we know that Dana Rivers attended camp trans and that’s now blatantly attempting to be ERASED and that’s very serious. Please do not threaten my Wikipedia account. I have no violations. I’ve done a good job editing. You will need to bring in an outside editor with no history on either page please . Thank you. MickTravisBickle (talk) 02:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this comment you described Rivers in highly defamatory terms, and you cannot describe a person in that manner anywhere on Wikipedia. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:47, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK it’s noted.

This is a copy of a press release from camp trans. Releasing their own statement about “renowned activist Dana Rivers”

“ More than 60 gender activists from these groups plus members of Transexual Menace, supportive attendees, and renowned activist Dana

Rivers gathered across the road from the Festival this year to do outreach and education on what they viewed as a discriminatory policy

being unfairly applied.”

https://twitter.com/4th_WaveNow/status/971600053411381248/photo/1

http://eminism.org/michigan/20000812-camptrans.txt MickTravisBickle (talk) 03:47, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers 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 practice;
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.

You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for serious and repeated failure to comply with BLP 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 ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2023 (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))

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 post of this notice.

Courcelles (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing to violate BLP to complain about your block is unacceptable. Feel free to use UTRS. Courcelles (talk) 16:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]