User talk:173.224.9.144

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, at 173.224.9.144, has made edits to ActBlue that do not conform to our policies and guidelines and therefore have been reverted. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you did not do this, you may wish to consider [ getting a username] to avoid confusion with other editors. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:
 * Help contents – the main help page.
 * Quick guide – a "cheatsheet" listing the main editing commands.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Introduction to Wikipedia

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out Questions, ask the Help Desk, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 03:59, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi. Good luck hiding the fraud by ActBlue 173.224.9.144 (talk) 13:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Buddy, I'm not trying to hide anything. I live in the only state ActBlue can't even operate in, so I don't have any incentive to portray them one way or the other. I am perfectly willing to help you write a policy-compliant version of your contribution, but the way you wrote it makes it seem like you are only here to expose an organization you have an issue with. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 16:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! That's very kind of you.
 * Frankly, I do not have much experience editing Wikipedia articles.
 * I have seen at least 3 sources discussing an ongoing investigation of fraud from ActBlue where senior citizens are unaware that their identity has been used as a claimed political donor, when they have not made such donations.
 * 1. How can I express this in a wikipedia-policy-compliant manner? Do you have advice on that?
 * 2. Why isn't a Senator's letter to the FEC allowed as a source?
 * 3. Why isn't the O'Keefe Media group allowed as a source?
 * 4. Why isn't The Carolina Journal allowed as a source?
 * To me it's a irrational (and just plain silly, myopic, and misguided) to make claims of bias or reliability, when no source is objectively unbiased or 100% absolutely reliable/infallible.
 * Thanks. 173.224.9.144 (talk) 02:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Glad you are willing to accept the help! :D
 * Here's a pretty long explanation...
 * Wikipedia sourcing is covered by our policy labeled Reliable sources. Basically, we try to find sources normally agreed to be "reliable", but obviously what can be considered as such is subject to much debate.
 * For some sources, they're frequently discussed enough we actually have it in a giant list of often discussed sources. O'Keefe Media Group is on that list under WP:VERITAS which summarizes our many previous discussions as saying to never use it. It's highly unlikely that will change in the near future, so it's best to just accept that for now.
 * As for a Senator's letter, it's a primary source for Wikipedia purposes. It can sometimes be used, but it's not ideal to use it for incredibly controversial claims (hence why you don't see statements made by Bernie Sanders at the main article for Amazon). It's not completely unusable, but we have to be careful with how we use it.
 * Now, I don't know much about The Carolina Journal. disputes its reliability, but that's only one person's opinion. You could bring it to a wider discussion at somewhere like WP:RS/N, but that's going to a lot of time spent for something that might not even come out in your favour. If you are interested in pursuing this, I can walk you through those steps as well.
 * I did find an alternative source in The New York Times. There's a surprising amount of stuff about ActBlue in there. As a result, I think a policy compliant version of what you are trying to include is something like: (this would be in the Fundraising section instead of by itself)
 * In 2021, ActBlue was investigated in four states for potentially fraudulent donation practices.
 * It doesn't include any of the stuff about the elderly abuse, but you have to remember that the story is still developing. The FEC has yet to actually weigh in on the matter, but I'm sure when they do it'll receive the right amount of coverage where we can fully source our statements one way or the other.
 * Cheers! &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 06:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks a ton! Super helpful!
 * I will work this into my priorities list. 173.224.9.144 (talk) 14:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, let me know if you need any other help { &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 20:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)