User talk:CwbinTn

Contribution to GamerGate ArbCom case
I recommend that you revert or change the title of the new section you created in Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Evidence. Normally they only let you post in your section titled "Evidence presented by " --Obsidi (talk) 02:41, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

This is not how you use that page. Your contributions will most likely be removed for not following the template and probably also for being a freshly created account. I suggest removing them yourself. Weedwacker (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate that you're trying to help "your side", but I think your edits will unfortunately be made an example of, in a bad way, to demonstrate off-site coordination or something like that. They are not helping your case. Many of the references are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia - they will be ignored. Please, remove your edits. starship .paint   ~ regal  03:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

My links that circulate in the GamerGate hashtag on Twitter frequently aren't 'reliable' but Gawker is listed as a 'reliable source' on the Wiki itself? No, my entry stays. I don't know my boss's login password for the WTF Magazine wiki or I'd have used it but I'm deep in this story and I know what's reliable and what's not. I'm not pushing an agenda. Just putting the truth out. CwbinTn (talk) 03:18, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I understand your intentions. I, too, have tried to make the GamerGate article more neutral. But I don't think you really understand what Wikipedia considers to be reliable and what's not. That's different from what you consider to be reliable. I've been on Wikipedia since 2011, I believe I understand the policies better than you do. starship .paint   ~ regal  03:36, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

CwbinTn, regardless of the reliability of your sources, my understanding is that the purpose of the evidence page is to provide evidence of the wrongdoings of editors, not simply of what the article content ought (not) to include. 76.64.35.209 (talk) 03:47, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Notice: sanctions apply to Gamergate controversy topics
I understand and would like to see if the mods could just remove my post entirely as to not muddy the waters. I'm helping out the operators of the gamergate.me site with things past 2 months and I'm new to Wikipedia and don't want to cause more confusion since the issue is already mired enough. I don't want to add to it. Again, If you guys can, just delete my entry and I'll leave it to the pro editors with the long-standing accts on the gamergate.me side edit / present evidence. CwbinTn (talk) 04:31, 28 November 2014 (UTC)CwbinTn

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wtf magazine (December 29)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Joe Decker was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wtf magazine and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:CwbinTn Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Joe_Decker&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:CwbinTn reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

j⚛e deckertalk 03:33, 29 December 2014 (UTC)