User talk:68.69.205.221

edit war
Please read wp:editwar and wp:3rr, as well as wp:consensus, at this rate you will,get a block, I suggest you stop.Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

You're knowingly putting inaccurate or at the very least incomplete information on a page about an ongoing investigation. We don't know if Paul Manafort's monitoring extended to his time with Trump campaign. I suggest you stop spreading misinformation.
 * That is your opinion, you need to make your case on the talk page, not keep reverting. The article has long standing content, yo need to make the case to change it.Slatersteven (talk) 13:12, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

It's not my opinion, it's stated on wikipedia's own page on the subject,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%93present), that we do not know whether or not the tapping of Manafort extended to his time with the Trump campaign. There are three sources listed there, the investigation page makes a radical claim in the face of a current lack of information. If anything it's opinion to indicate that the claims have been debunked when the information just isn't there. I didn't know Wikipedia was in the business of perpetuating unsubstantiated claims.
 * Wikipedia is not a reliable source, Please read wp:RS. Also it might help you to read wp:v.Slatersteven (talk) 13:20, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

I suppose the 3 sources that wikipedia uses on that page aren't valid either.
 * They may well be RS, so why not take those to the talk page and make your case? If your case is strong you will get your way. But you need consensus. This is my last comment here, the next time you revert I will report you.Slatersteven (talk) 13:25, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough, God forbid you be questioned, better threaten some more. "Wikipedia is not a reliable source" you can say that again...