User talk:AccuracyFix

Welcome!
Hi AccuracyFix! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing!

September 2020
Neutralitytalk 01:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Do you have some affiliation with, or connection to, Richard Uihlein?
Do you have some affiliation with, or connection to, Richard Uihlein? I ask in relationship to our conflict of interests policy.

Also, separably what you are doing now is called Edit warring. You need to get consensus for your changes, and you also must not mischaracterize sources. Neutralitytalk 01:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I have no affiliation or connection with Richard Uihlein whatsoever. I am interested in Wiki content keeping accurate to the cited source. Snooganssnoogans changed the meaning of the original source to indicate that Richard Uihlein is anti-gay in general, while the context of the cited source is about the use of the girls bathroom by transgender.

I do not see why Snooganssnoogans should have sole monopoly over generating inaccurate content while I am improving the style and accuracy of the same content. Snooganssnoogans must have some agenda to modify the meaning of the cited source and to war against improvements in accuracy.

Trying to fix Libelous and Defamatory Material on a Living Biography
I am trying to fix libelous and defamatory material on the living biography, however it appears that admin user Neutrality is working in coordination with infamous user Snooganssnoogans (who is known for smearing biographies) to keep libelous out-of-context material on the biography. User Neutrality is focusing on a flawed sockpuppets analysis that groups me together with more users than in reality (and by the way, I am a real human being, not a puppet). There appears to be serious abuse of user Neutrality admin privilege in violating Wiki rules that state that contentious libel on a living biography must be removed immediately. I would like to raise this to the admin noticeboard and/or the living biography noticeboard but user Neutrality has blocked me.
 * Not an administrator, but by looking at what's going on I believe the problem here is that you:

WhoAteMyButter ( 📬 │ ✏️ ) 03:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) didn't obtain consensus for changes that change the tone of the section
 * 2) edit warred and reverted past 3RR
 * 3) used multiple IP addresses to input the same - or similar - edits

WhoAteMyButter, The multiple sockpuppets is a false accusation. The admin Neutrality was fishing for some reason to try to censor me and the other contributors: You can see this admin's malicious intent of censorship by suspecting me of Conflict of Interest with connection to the person in the biography and posting this Conflict of Interest to my Talk page. The actual violations here are 1. Snooganssnoogans placing libelous contentious material on a living biography (same user who is notorious for doing this to other pages), 2. False enforcement of sockpuppets and 3RR rule (the only person who violated that rule is Snooganssnoogans), and 2. activist political editing by Wiki admin Neutrality while suppressing general public user improvements.


 * To request an unblock, use unblock again, as you correctly did before. Please do not use adminhelp for this purpose. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:35, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I see that there is a section on the sockpuppets investigation Whey77 where "Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below." However I cannot add my comments because I am blocked. My purpose for the adminhelp tag is to assist me in entering the following comment on the sockpuppets investigation page, if you can please add this comment on my behalf: When I reverted the addition by Snooganssnoogans a few days ago, I was mindful of the following official Wikipedia policy. Please for a moment realize that I'm following your own rules, very clearly written below. The only person who is edit warring is user Snooganssnoogans. I see that the other users are following the BRD cycle and evolving the text. Also, I am unfairly being grouped together with other people -- there are other people in the community who seem to be bothered by Snooganssnoogans entry as well. "The following reverts are exempt from the edit-warring policy: 7. Removing contentious material that is libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced according to our biographies of living persons (BLP) policy."
 * You may defend yourself on this page, in the form of an unblock request. 331dot (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2020 (UTC)