User talk:82.27.90.157

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions&#32;so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply  [ create a named account] . It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:
 * Create new pages and rename pages
 * Edit semi-protected pages
 * Upload images
 * Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (82.27.90.157) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a new Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Questions, or you can  to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;).

Happy editing! — Paleo  Neonate  — 02:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notification
Ian.thomson (talk) 19:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There's also similar sanctions in place for pages related to 9/11 conspiracy theories. Griffin denies the relationship between HIV and AIDS, and promotes 9/11 conspiracy theories -- we can, must, and do explain that such ideas are objectively wrong.
 * Anyone who would say that Griffin's work represents commitment to the truth is not going to be much use in building a mainstream encyclopedia based on mainstream academic and journalistic sources. Stop wasting your time and ours at Talk:G. Edward Griffin.  Ian.thomson (talk) 19:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for being here to spread 9/11 conspiracy theories, right after you were told how bad an idea that'd be. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:15, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits to God is dead
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edits because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! ― Susmuffin Talk 05:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!
TheDoDahMan (talk) 20:41, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Reported.
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Your behavior had been reported.Rja13ww33 (talk) 18:00, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019
Your recent editing history at Allegations of CIA drug trafficking shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Meters (talk) 18:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
 * And accusing an editor of being a CIA operative posting disinformation is a personal attack. See WP:NPA and don't do that again. Meters (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.


 * Note: threats and conspiracy theories about editors are not likely to help. Editors should really focus on processes: proposing sources, evaluating their reliability, establishing consensus about what to include, and due faithful summary of those sources.  This requires patience and a certain level of detachment.  — Paleo  Neonate  – 10:26, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Your reversion of deletion of unsourced material on Blue note
Regarding Special:Diff/924884914/930598223: I had previously removed this material with an explanation the talk page. Please explain there why you re-added it. --Allen (talk) 21:07, 9 February 2020 (UTC)