User talk:Cheese croissant

March 2022
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Thierry Baudet, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Shadow4dark (talk) 00:29, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. 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. Thank you. Shadow4dark (talk) 01:17, 17 March 2022 (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.

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. 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:. Drmies (talk) 01:19, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

- the user's edits seem to be in good faith. He is a newbie, and like most newbies isn't sourcing his edits. However, most of his edits can be sourced. His "fascist" edit was a BLP violation, though indefinitely blocking an editor for one mistake seems like overkill to me. Would you object to an unblock? PhilKnight (talk) 08:17, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * PhilKnight, I don't, but this seemed like a joke account to me. "Often described as a fascist" will be impossible to prove with reliable secondary sources, and the same goes for "pro-Russian". It's true that Baudet has said a whole bunch of bone-headed things, but his, eh, embarrassingly silly position on the war in Ukraine doesn't necessarily make him pro-Russian. The claims the editor added only improve on Facebook commentaries by being phrased in the passive voice. Cheese Cracker, you will have to be much more careful, and you have to START with secondary sources. Drmies (talk) 15:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * CheeseCroissant, here is a case of the process working: I block you, looks at my decision and disagrees, and calls me back to your edits, and I am perfectly happy to accept their decision (thank you Phil). I'll repeat, though, that all this has to start with secondary sources. On my Facebook feed this morning, in a post about yesterday's elections, I saw an FvD poster saying something like "there's only two genders"--if I wanted to do anything with that, I'd have to look for a newspaper, a national daily (Trouw, de Volkskrant, etc.), that verifies this and comments on it. That is the kind of thing you can do, and of course Baudet has said so many things that go against all kinds of things: common sense, decency, etc., but that can only make its way into article space if it's properly verified, neutral, etc. from the get-go, especially given the WP:BLP (please look at that: it's incredibly important here). Take care, Drmies (talk) 13:54, 18 March 2022 (UTC)