User talk:BakedGoods357

June 2021
Hello, I'm Moxy. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Moxy - 04:06, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Misleading comments on talk pages and WP:OR
I noticed you have made several comments to the effect that the people of Afghanistan are overwhelmingly in favour of the Taliban. I'd like to remind you that unless you have reliable sourcing for this claim, this would constitute original research, which is a contravention of our original research prohibition policy. This policy applies to talk pages as well.

Thank you for your attention, 69.172.145.94 (talk) 02:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I don’t need original sources to write a comment on a talk page, that’s never been a rule. My reasoning is that if a group is able to take over an entire country and overthrow their government in 11 days with almost no resistance, they obviously aren’t hated by the majority of the people.

I see you commenting on other people’s profiles similar messages whenever someone says something that you disagree with. This frankly isn’t the point of the site and doesn’t benefit anyone. BakedGoods357 (talk) 03:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My reasoning is that if a group is able to take over an entire country and overthrow their government in 11 days with almost no resistance, they obviously aren’t hated by the majority of the people. That may be true, but at the same time, that cannot be asserted without providing reliable sources - especially not in article space, and even in talkpages where it would bite new users, especially those who are understandably upset about the situation in Afghanistan, and are now confused why editors are telling them that they "didn't fight hard enough for their country". Finally, I assume good faith on your part, per wp:AGF. people’s profiles similar messages whenever someone says something that you disagree with is not assuming good faith - you should desist from doing so. We are here to build an encyclopedia, with reliable sourcing for every assertion made on an article. We are not here to speculate, litigate, or insinuate anything about the subjects of articles, nor about their populations. 69.172.145.94 (talk) 04:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I came here to comment on the same thing as the IP. BakedGoods357, you really need to change how you use talk pages. This is not a forum, and your treating it as such is beginning to get disruptive. Your speculations and thoughts about Afghanistan (or other subjects) are as valid as anyone else's, but Wikipedia talk pages are not the place for you to put them forward. We write articles based on reliable sources, not on personal opinions. Take this as a mild warning that the behavior you've displayed during several days already needs to change now. Jeppiz (talk) 08:36, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Edit Warring
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Jesus. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. User:Thebighomie123 (talk) --Thebighomie123 (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The fact that you have the audacity to accuse me of such an offensive when you in fact were the one committing this is shocking to say the least. I will be in contact with administrators. Also, your changing of the signing of this post is suspicious to say the least. BakedGoods357 (talk) 23:25, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , . Edit warring. You seem to have knocked it off, that's great. I suggest you let this go and hopefully are reminded this is a collaborative project, and you not escalate over a standardized and quite correct warning template unless you enjoy being boomerang'd. VQuakr (talk) 18:46, 8 December 2021 (UTC)