User talk:2601:200:8200:4A10:2412:18C3:F338:2F47

August 2022
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages (including user talk pages) such as Talk:Palmer Report are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. They are not for general discussion about the article topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Why did you delete this person's comment? It wasn't at all nasty. Are you worried that others might answer this person WITH sources regarding Palmer Report? 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:1CDC:F16C:EEFA:A006 (talk) 03:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry user:
 * User talk:2601:200:8200:4A10:2412:18C3:F338:2F47
 * There are many people who feel the same about Palmer. I provided a few sources but  have been told
 * 1) Not reliable
 * 2) IS reliable but nobody would be interested in hearing about it. (That was Bryan Williams of MSNC).
 * 3) The person who complimented PR was only a part-time contributor so it does not count.
 * 4) I'm a soc
 * 5) Others are socs (only PR fans of coarse)
 * 6) Sometimes I do not get any response at all.
 * The bottom line is they (a few editors -- not everybody on wiki) despise PR. This comment I am making will likely be wiped clean before you see it. I am guessing they're mostly rightwing. The main one is called Dr. swag. He uses obscure rightwing sites which for some reason, ALWAYS pass the source test even though MSNBC, Newsweek and Forbes do not. All of the three I mentioned have said postive things about OR. Wiki will not allow anyone to use them.
 * I hope you keep trying because most people allow the editors to bully them off the page.I am just telling you though it doesn't matter how many soucres you give them, they will find a way not to post ANYTHING positive.

2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:1CDC:F16C:EEFA:A006 (talk) 03:43, 13 August 2022 (UTC) N 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:1CDC:F16C:EEFA:A006 (talk) 03:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)