User talk:Bigrig245

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Doug Weller talk 13:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

February 2019
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, you may be blocked from editing. Doug Weller talk 13:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Paul Joseph Watson. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 13:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 13:56, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive 1
And what have I done that’s disruptive?, because I told you that you are biased, because you are and if you want to block me then go ahead, but it just shows that you can’t take criticism so that’s all I have to say about that. Bigrig245 (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * You didn't tell me anything at all, you must be confused. This is nothing to do with not taking criticism, it's about the proper use of talk pages and assuming good faith and WP:Civility. If you don't want to follow our rules, then you shouldn't be here. Doug Weller  talk 14:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive 2
Then point out what I did, Paul’s Wikipedia page lists him as fake news, which isn’t true and i added my opinion to the talk subject, but I can be where I please because I’m allowed to state what I feel is wrong and if you don’t like then it’s a personal problem Bigrig245 (talk) 14:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * You wrote "You’re so full of crap, you don’t have any credibility to call him out as fake news, it’s Wikipedia’s liberal bias against people you don’t like. This is supposed to be a non political site but it’s apparently obvious that it’s ran by snowflake morons. Besides, most people know that Wikipedia isn’t a credible place to get information from so go on and claim fake news because you will have to put that next to CNN’s Wikipedia, they have been found to publish a false news story more than once. Bigrig245 (talk) 13:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)" Article talk pages are not forums for complaints about Wikipedia and calling people "full of crap" or "morons" or "snowflakes" is puerile and unacceptable. Nor are we interested in your opinion or my opinion unless backed by policy, guideline, or what we consider reliable sources. We don't pretend to be anything but a mainstream encyclopedia, we aren't Conservapedia, Rightpedia, Metapedia, or RationalWiki. If you are just here to complain about what Wikipedia is or attack editors specifically or in general, then you are WP:NOTHERE to help build Wikipedia and thus don't belong here. It's your choice as I said above. Doug Weller  talk 14:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive 3
I never asked to make it some sort of right wing media biased, i stated my opinion because you list no sources that back your claims up, Wikipedia used to allow people to freely edit pages and yes some did add stupid things but now you can’t do anything because you just want it to stay as it is. But you don’t have a right to tell me I don’t belong here, I haven’t made any edits to any pages but I added to the fact what the other person stated as a biased points of view, Mark Dice is one because you list him out of work when in fact he has almost two million subscribers as of today, you don’t list that so don’t tell me about creditable sources because that’s wrong. Bigrig245 (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * No, if there was ever a time when Wikipedia had no rules it must have been in the first few months. You can stay here but you need to follow Talk page guidelines. Read them. Doug Weller  talk 15:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive 4
And to prove my point about bias on this website is the fact that you are considering deleting him as a YouTube Personality when he has 1.5 million subscribers and that’s a fact so tell me how that is not bias. Bigrig245 (talk) 15:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive 5
I only made one comment, I don’t call that being disruptive and like I said before, if you want to kick me off then I don’t really care and I’m done talking about this so say good day sir. Bigrig245 (talk) 15:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * So far you have made two disruptive comments outside of your owm talk p[age: and . You can get away with this if you only do it two or three times, but keep it up and you are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please read our page at WP:NOTHERE. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive 6
I can’t edit anything anyways because I guess I’m not official, I get sick and tired of the blatant bias that has come over the media In the past decade, to me they are painting certain people as crazy bigots while they don’t label things like Huffington post as left wing or fake news because they have published misleading articles before it’s only what they consider right wing do they call them Conspiracy theorists if you don’t believe just look them up, I didn’t curse at anybody and didn’t name anybody specific as to who I was calling a moron but I don’t find that to be disruptive, like I told the last guy, I’m not looking to make anything right wing or left wing, but I’m pointing out the bias that I do see on some of these pages and this place should be neutral. Bigrig245 (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * This is your final warning.


 * Per Tendentious editing, "You might think that Wikipedia is a place to set the record straight and Right Great Wrongs, but that's not the case. We can  the righting of great wrongs, but we can't ride the crest of the wave because we can only report that which is verifiable from reliable and secondary sources, giving appropriate weight to the balance of informed opinion: even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. So, if you want to explain the "truth" or "reality" of a current or historical political, religious, or moral issue, you'll have to wait until it's been reported in mainstream media or published in books from reputable publishing houses."


 * Per User pages and User pages, "Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project. "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" is usually interpreted as applying to user space as well as the encyclopedia itself. Particularly, community-building activities that are not strictly "on topic" may be allowed, especially when initiated by committed Wikipedians with good edit histories. At their best, such activities help us to build the community, and this helps to build the encyclopedia.  But at the same time, if user page activity becomes disruptive to the community or gets in the way of the task of building an encyclopedia, it must be modified to prevent disruption. Unrelated content includes, but is not limited to:


 * Extensive discussion not related to Wikipedia.
 * Extensive personal opinions on matters unrelated to Wikipedia, wiki philosophy, collaboration, free content, the Creative Commons, etc.
 * Extensive writings and material on topics having virtually no chance whatsoever of being directly useful to the project, its community, or an encyclopedia article. (For example in the latter case, because it is pure original research, is in complete disregard of reliable sources, or is clearly unencyclopedic for other clear reasons.)
 * Polemical statements unrelated to Wikipedia, or statements attacking or vilifying groups of editors, persons, or other entities (these are generally considered divisive and removed, and reintroducing them is often considered disruptive).


 * In general, if you have material that is inappropriate for Wikipedia, it should be placed on a personal web site. Many free and low-cost web hosting, email, and weblog services are widely available, and are a proper place for content unrelated to Wikipedia. For wiki-style community collaboration, you can download the MediaWiki software and install it on your own server if you want full control, or use one of many online wiki farms."
 * As I said, this is your final warning. Stop what you are doing now. Find some other area of Wikipedia and make productive edits there. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:45, 16 February 2019 (UTC)