User talk:Berkshires

General sanctions alert
El_C 03:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

July 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Zefr. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. ''Stop restoring that content on the user's page. '' Meters (talk) 03:25, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * And your comment "i am ready to edit war till the end." is not going to look good if this ever does get to the EW board. Meters (talk) 03:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Warning
Please do not contravene your topic ban or you may face further sanctions, including being restricted from editing for an unspecified duration. El_C 03:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Berkshires, it seems our talk pages are both now filled with warnings due to trying to post anything positive about HCQ. It seems as if there are some people that are dead set on it looking bad, can only wonder if their motives are political (Trump drug) or motivated by money (bad news for HCQ = good news for competitor drugs). I think we may need to start reporting these disruptive users soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbymcd (talk • contribs) 13:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems wikipedia is actually worse than most online platforms due to the fact that they claim to be independent and open. But in fact there's a few people controlling article content, and there is no way to know if somebody is paying them for their "work" in maintaining a rhetoric on a topic. I am quite sure there are certain players being paid since they also spend a lot of time on editing the pages, probably a full-time job. Facebook and youtube is also censoring like crazy, but with wikipedia anybody can theoretically just pay a few people to control a topic to say whatever they want. Funny enough, Twitter (@adriaandehaan) seems to be the most open platform of the lot at the moment. Alexbrn actually has a sockpuppet as his profile page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alexbrn So I guess it's not even a secret, he's basically trolling.Adriaandh (talk) 20:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * This is a topic ban violation isn't it, — Paleo Neonate  – 11:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)