User talk:Bugatti35racer

Welcome


Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! - Ahunt (talk) 23:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

December 2015
Welcome to Wikipedia. I notice that you added some content to Dead Sea Scrolls that appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint. Unfortunately, this edit appears to give undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:18, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That's fine if your experience editing Wikipedia shows that to be a correct move on your part. Should not the majority viewpoint always be open to fine tuning or inclusion of logically stable new ideas that have an overwhelming degree of potential?  Fringe?  What good is an alleged neutral POV if that point of view does not allow for any discussion?  ARCheology by its nature is never a closed book, and it is the Science most often found to be faulty.  Archeology is a unique science, and treating it as if it where some sort of Scientifically verifiable and repeatable Science is folly.Bugatti35racer (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

March 2018
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.  Acroterion   (talk)   17:13, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Last chance. "Senior Wiki editors for the most part are Hitler worshippers and Nazi lovers, as well as trust fund babies" ?? Knock it off.
And I see you've also called individual editors Nazis. Next time you will probably be blocked, definitely if I see it. Deleting this shows that you've read it and of course section headings remain in the history. Doug Weller talk 12:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Well Doug, when you have certain senior editors claiming (for instance) only Nazi Luftwaffe pilots in WW2 were any good, and the top British Aces were just lucky bums, you should really wonder. This same editor in question makes threats just like you, so you are in sketchy company. Same editor likes to erase well referenced and valid and interesting info on British Aces and their achievements, yet includes every bit of inane drivel that can be found on German pilots, and has a tantrum when useless facts like idle RPM of an ME-109 is questioned for relevance in a general article.

Instead of treating me like the vandal you are, why not look into some of these Nazi loving editors? I can give you a list of names if you like? When senior editors refuse to acknowledge legit sources that contradict their demented view of the world, and allow fringe lunatic sources to be admissible because they agree with their world view, that should be seen a a problem. Don't you agree, Doug? Next you and your ilk will be falsely claiming I hate all senior editors, while I specifically only pointed out a very few.Bugatti35racer (talk) 20:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It's a shame you went about it this way. I've made sure that at least one pro-Nazi source was removed from WWII articles. If you're right, and you might be, I've heard the same thing from others, you've hit an own goal. Doug Weller  talk 21:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * What Doug says. We don't want WP articles to be vehicles for Nazi glorification, but you've drowned out positive suggestions with shrill denunciations of other editors and with promotion of outlandish conspiracy theories.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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:.  Acroterion   (talk)   20:41, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Attacks like this and the rant you posted above are wholly unacceptable outside a Usenet flame war.   Acroterion   (talk)   20:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * also noted.  Acroterion   (talk)   20:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)