User talk:Pole6464

Biased disruptive edits[edit]

You shouldn't cherrypick which of his tweets go through. His BLm support is already mentioned. But I can also show you how he was against the violence being planned on the Capitol (https://twitter.com/realjaydenx/status/1345163679453622272), (https://twitter.com/realjaydenx/status/1346626169777627141), (https://twitter.com/realjaydenx/status/1346285219993825281), (https://twitter.com/realjaydenx/status/1344863671357480963). The tweet you added is about a protestor burning the American flag and him hating the system. Choosing one statement over others, then adding yourself he "supports BLM and ANTIFA" is a deceptive practice. And undoubtedly bias. It's not allowed over here. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 08:31, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your attempt at providing news source is false. https://www.canyon-news.com/john-sullivan-detained-after-riot-in-washington/139872 doesn't say anything you're claiming nor highlights the tweet you added. It simply says he was in a BLM-Antifa protest. I am going to be complaining you. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 08:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not who upload this proof and image, so if you think, just no left me to edit it, and the true no exists, you are wrong, everyone know it early. Pole6464 (talk) 09:32, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI complain[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 09:11, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

Hello, I'm JackintheBox. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to John Earle Sullivan—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 09:20, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, if this image https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EruqGZOVkAALEPy.jpg is not from Twitter, where is from? Maybe he can lie to me, but cant to the world. Pole6464 (talk) 09:29, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't act like a vandal, that's not how notices are given. You've already been told not to cherry-pick. Yet using one image you decide what his favourite hashtags are. The image clearly shows his hatred for the system and if you watched its video, it was about burning the American flag, do you need the link? [1]. Not to mention you use a report saying about him attending a BLM-antifa protest to cite an earlier unsourced claim he's a BLM-Antifa supporter. Biased edits are not allowed here. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 09:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can't belive how many #antifa I can find from the google about, all from news in English, the problem is not me, dont miss it, I am just a nobody. But, the true is there. [2] , good luck baby . Pole6464 (talk) 10:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All is from his twitter , not from me, and the news captured them, and posted on the news, not me. Pole6464 (talk) 10:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know why the socialists fear that he is Antifa, he entered the Capitol, and the socialists say, no one from Antifa or BLM were inside. The true is the true ! He was there. Pole6464 (talk) 10:07, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And a lot of people, we backup the images, don´t think google or twitter or facebook delete them and the proof will disappear. Never! Pole6464 (talk) 10:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your own statements make it clear you're here to deflect with claims about Antifa involvement. John Sullivan has never been identified as an Antifa member nor he identifies himself as such. Even the FBI didn't claim he was so. For sure he may agree with antifa participating alongside racial justice protestors, but I'm sure all racial justice protestors will unless they have concerns about violence. He is a BLM supporter fir sure but not part of any BLM circles. I've added his own conduct and statements myself in the past. As well as about his involvement in the Capitol. Here his own tweet about him going to document the riots (https://twitter.com/realjaydenx/status/1346521354024189952). Cherry-picking to support one political cause or another is not allowed here. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 10:19, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

he support(ed), the image says it, why you care so much?? Socialist??? Pole6464 (talk) 10:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Typical. My name is just a joke but you can't help in name-calling. You say he supported it, but what do you mean by it? He just used a hashtag as Antifa have been regularly taking part in marches alongside BLM. Sure I think he might support antifa as well since a lot of BLM activists have them same goal of opposing racists and right-wing fascists, but it shouldn't be based on your hashtags. You know that already. Not to mention his statements about "burning it down" - referring to the American system was already mentioned by me earlier, so you're just repeating what others basically said. If you have any actual news source and not hashtags then use it. Otherwise don't waste time here to indulge in bias. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 10:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)´[reply]

if he no soppoted it, no # on twitter, it is so logic. Or you don't know how # on Twitter works?? Pole6464 (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say he didn't support it. Just that it needs more than a hashtag. Hashtags don't mean support. I've been on Twitter long enough and they are also used to describe a situation. Of course many racial justice protestors do support them since they have same goal of being against fascism and racism and Sullivan might too. Regardless of that, you are not to use your own thought-process here. And your edits consist far more than just claims about his support. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 11:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

the # means you are agreed about something, or he wants to be part of, the participation! Pole6464 (talk) 11:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

#antifa, when he writes #antifa on his twitter, when someone writes #antifa, their twitter will appear in the list. This makes it easy for #antifa supporters to find you. And you say no, no, he no supports #antifa? Pole6464 (talk) 11:30, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is like #fucktrump, the idea is for who supports "anti-Trump" can find his posts of #fucktrump, now, do you understand how # works? Pole6464 (talk) 11:35, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So if I write #alqaeda or #isis does that mean I'm al-Qaeda or ISIS? I did write it on one account in past just to document news reports. My account was later supended for hate speech but it didn't have anything to do with those groups nor I'm a supporter. You're making your own claims here. If someone says "fuck Trump" they're cursing Trump. Typing an organisation or movement's name like even #blm doesn't make them a member. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 11:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

if you type #fucktrump #antifa #blm and with image or video of violence, all together in a text, then you say, no, they have nothing to do, sir, in the USA, this means your thinking posture. Pole6464 (talk) 11:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

if you only write #antifa, of course, it no means you support it! BUT BUT together with the same link between themselves, #fucktrump #antifa #blm, this has meaning Pole6464 (talk) 11:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you hate Trump of course you're going to write fuck Trump. What else is he going to write about in an anti-system protest asides from describing it? He also hates the current political capitalist system, as expressed clearly in his tweet about abolishing it. You also falsely claimed he was an antifa member earlier [3], but he's not part of any antifa organisations. He is against fascism though which he has clearly said, but that's about it. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 12:06, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

anti- everything of a democrat country, I see it is a communist and socialist accion. Pole6464 (talk) 12:11, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

#blm #antifa #burn #fuckthesystem #abolishcapitalism #abolishthepolice #acab #fucktrump >>> all these words together on his twitters, sir. no capitalism, means socialism, or communism. Pole6464 (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But thing here is he's never expressed necessarily bringing in communism or socialism in any of his posts. In a past speech he explicitly talked about working to make and bring in any system which benefits people and gives them freedom. And he's explicitly shown in his own posts in the past that he is against fascism and is an anti-fascist since he hates fascists. And I'm sure any logical person dislikes fascists as well. As far as being antifa goes, that's the most I could find. Your claims aren't even based in reality. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 12:31, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-capitalism no means socialism or communism... is too absurd Pole6464 (talk) 12:40, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes because it's a myth. If you ever read the same article you would have known he doesn't think it benefits the people. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've also recently added his own statement about supporting BLM and him as well as his group being anti-fascist because he opposes fascism rather than being a member of Antifa or BLM organisations. This could have been added neutrally by you earlier, had you not tried to be biased. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 13:04, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessary to discute anymore with you, obviously, with all the posts of his twitter, he supports BLM and anti-fascism ANTIFA. Good luck! Pole6464 (talk) 16:10, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't provided a shred of evidence. I never even contradicted what you claimed. Because it's certain he supports their ideology. But I've yet to see anything specifically saying he supports antifa or any antifa group in particular. In fact he even celebrated left and right-wing activists stepping on American flag together. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

that is your problem for no see, not my problem. If you consider that your twitter texts are not reliable it does not show anything, well, it is no longer my problem. If from now on, the twitter texts cited by the author (himself) are no longer reliable, then, the use of twitter on the web must be prohibited, and twitter must be closed. Because all the twitter texts posted around the world are no longer reliable!? Pole6464 (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see his Twitter texts as not reliable, but your assertions you are claiming are based on them as not reliable. Especially after you've admitted your own motives earlier. By the way, the article now contains nearly everything about his behaviour and support you were formerly claiming. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 17:59, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 16:33, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 16:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note the above alerts apply to all pages, including talk pags[edit]

And we crack down harder on personal attacks and failure to show good faith in these areas. Also note that article talk pages are for discussion of the article itself and NOT the subject of the article. Doug Weller talk 16:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2021 (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).

Pole6464 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't like the wiki only allows the one voice, if this is like it says, freedom to edit, but, I see it is not, it only post the people who has power. Pole6464 (talk) 07:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You've given no reason why you should be unblocked. GirthSummit _(blether) 08:27, 19 January 2021 (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.

I don´t care, because when I see someone in my Talk about Anti-capitalism is not socialism or communism, I know why the article about the edition, never can be reasonable , because in Wiki itself says anti-capitalism is socialism. And you say, I am wrong, ok, don´t care. Wiki is only a reference more, not the truth! Pole6464 (talk) 08:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]