User talk:2A02:908:456:CC40:DC34:5AB5:1F39:EA54

November 2023
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Gunung Padang. 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: 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. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 16:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Gunung Padang
This is far too soon to add such an exceptional claim (and it is still a claim, they don't say proof). When there are peer reviewed sources discussing it, real archaeologists and also geologists who don't believe in Atlantis and do not have a nationalist pov, that will be the time. See WP:UNDUE. Doug Weller talk 17:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)


 * You could have easily maintained the content per WION source, by adding what researchers "claimed". I respect that you wrote me here to explain your concerns, instead of that despicable behavior from Joe Roe who first claimed BBC source as for kids, then reverted WION for no reason, with the audacity to threaten to block me even though I had the initial content and they reverted my content twice. Hey Joe Roe, I do not have an account, lol. Elon Musk was right about Wikipedia, as being infested by radicals who only care about enforcing their opinions. 2A02:908:456:CC40:DC34:5AB5:1F39:EA54 (talk) 18:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I can’t see how this is political. We shouldn’t be publishing fringe claims until they have been looked at by mainstream sources. Ironic about Musk, censors x. Doug Weller  talk 18:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Your first source was from CBBC – the C stands for "Children's". I reverted the re-addition with the WION reference because it was the same content just with different unreliable source, and three separate people had already objected to that content. You're welcome to discuss further on the talk page, as explained above. I haven't threatened to block you. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 19:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Does not matter wether CBBC or BBC, had they thought that content was fringe they would not have done it. I complained about your behaviour, in which you made fun of first ref, then removed whole content with another ref for no reason. As I mentioned earlier you could have simply reported that those behind the research claimed to have those results. My main concern here is that users remove whole cited content without discussing why with main contributor, I would never do that out of respect. To be honest, I would read different sources to modify the content, if necessary, while removing whole content which is reported with a reference is not a suitable solution, and Doug Weller, yes Musk is right, read his article, you made him conspiracy theorist and his X platform became a haven for hate speech, as according to whom?! Does not that considered blatant biasness. 2A02:908:456:CC40:DC34:5AB5:1F39:EA54 (talk) 19:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I doubt anyone at CCBC knows anything about the subject. CCBC is not a reliable source for this sort of subject. If you are unaware of how many reliable sources have said that sort of thing about Musk or if you don’t think he is, I’m not interested in your opinion and it seems clear you don’t care if it’s fringe. Doug Weller  talk 19:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Forgot, you’re right, Wikipedia is biased in favor of mainstream sources for science, archaeology, etc. It’s biased against, for instance, Creationism. Doug Weller  talk 19:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * You remind me of that BBC reporter who tried to confront Musk about hate speech on X, yet failed to name a certain incident, referring to mainstream sources in general as you mentioned. You cherry-pick what is reliable or not, even former Wikipedia founder, Larry Sanger, criticized you for that. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell once said that Trump killed Soleimani to divert attention from impeachment and investigation on his collusion with the Russians, would you add that he is a conspiracy theorist to his heading section, no of course not, he belongs to reliable mainstream media. 2A02:908:456:CC40:DC34:5AB5:1F39:EA54 (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)