User talk:2600:6C67:687F:7CBD:8C0A:D08C:D378:5D1A

Non-neutral claims cited to blog
Hi, I saw your edits to Richard C. Miller, cited to a blog. Thank you for trying to find a source (and to place a link to it in the article). However, I'm afraid the blog is clearly an involved party, not in any sense neutral, and the claims are, as the blog makes clear, controversial and indeed subject to possible legal action. This isn't the kind of source we can use on a biography of living persons (WP:BLP is the policy) article. I think that until a major newspaper like The New York Times covers the matter, we should keep clear of it. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:41, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Richard Miller (psychologist). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. ''Hi, look, I've explained to you carefully, politely, and at length why you can't do what you just did, and now you see fit to repeat that? Absolutely unacceptable! Please stop at once, sanctions are available.'' Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.