User talk:DARPASilentTalk

Regarding List of people who have lived in airports
Hello. I am a fellow editor on this site with an overly lengthy username. Sorry.

I noticed you made several edits to an entry on the article List of people who have lived in airports that discussed a man living in an airport in Thailand. In general, whenever one adds information about living people to this site, they need to back up their claims with reliable, secondary sources. You can read about them at this policy page; suffice to say, YouTube videos, Imgur photos, and Twitter posts are not counted as reliable sources under most circumstances, since anybody can create and upload them indiscriminately (and they especially cannot be used in articles on living people in most cases). If you can find mentions of him specifically in, say, a newspaper or a peer-reviewed journal, those could be cited and included in the list instead.

Secondly, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that events should be discussed in a fair and neutral manner, without giving undue weight to any one side. Because of this, you might notice that, say, the entry for Edward Snowden on the aforementioned list does not make an effort to paint him in any particular light: it merely describes the facts--that he tried to board a flight to Moscow, that the United States revoked his passport, and that he was subsequently stuck in the airport for 39 days. To go further than this (say, by calling him a hero or a villain for what he did) would be breaking NPOV at best and be defamation at worst, and said text would likely need to be immediately removed from the article.

Thus, if you are able to find neutral secondary sources discussing the subject, and if you then decide to rewrite the entry, I would encourage you to do the same: discuss the facts as described in the sources without doing any digging yourself and without painting any relevant parties in a non-neutral light. (One thing I would recommend is to actually create the section in your personal sandbox, tinker with it, and then paste it into the article once you're done.) If you need any help, feel free to let me know on my talk page, or you could visit the Teahouse instead, where you will find several editors willing to help you.

(By the way, feel free to branch out a bit with regards to your edits; there's nothing saying you are only allowed to edit one article. Of course, what you edit is up to you.) TheHardestAspect OfCreatingAnAccount IsAlwaysTheUsername 07:45, 26 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I am C.C. Martin. How do you think I had a copy of "his" (i.e. MY) US passport and a copy of my Thailand prison ID card (which I uploaded/linked on the Wikipedia entry).


 * Why on earth would you remove the entry when I supplied THAT much supporting documentation including photo of me LIVING INSIDE of the Bangkok Don Mueang airport on multiple different days...and a copy of my Thailand prison ID card after I was arrested and charged with the visa violation?!? DARPASilentTalk (talk) 16:18, 26 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Because that sort of thing falls under our proscription on original research. I'm sure you're telling the truth, but if we accepted "I SWEAR, THIS REALLY HAPPENED TO ME, LOOK HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY NOT EDITED" as a source, that would be abused by bad-faith actors very, very quickly. Because humans are terrible. You know this. DS (talk) 21:39, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, indeed.

Those who whitewash/censor on behalf of the US intelligence community, to protect the likes of Wilbur Ross, CalPERS, PA Treausry, Goldman Sachs et al (as the PRIMARY SOURCE, i.e. .gov published annual reports, documentation/links that I provided clearly showed)...

...such as Wikipedia's "editors"...

...are certainly terrible humans.

I definitely see your point now. DARPASilentTalk (talk) 03:20, 27 January 2020 (UTC)