User talk:Daviddodecree

Welcome!
Hello, Daviddodecree, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page List of common misconceptions has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

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. Again, welcome. Sundayclose (talk) 14:52, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

May 2017
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Murder of Seth Rich, you may be blocked from editing. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

DS Alert
NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

1RR + BLP/RS violation
Your edit to Murder of Seth Rich violates the one-revert rule and the Biographies of Living Persons policy. Your previous revert was here. In addition, you have inserted unreliable sources, notably Twitter. I request that you self-revert; otherwise I will request arbitration enforcement sanctions against you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Your subsequent edit without response here suggests that you have no intention of self-reverting your 1RR violation; I will thus be filing an AE request. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:44, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I fixed the reference to Twitter, and I never directly reverted an article. I read the policy see what you mean in terms of removing a snarky comment about "credible sources" and replacing it with sources being a "revert". I'd assumed that was ok since I was replacing it with sources. Oh well, I didn't have anything invested in this account. Daviddodecree (talk) 04:52, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:46, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Daviddodecree, you appear to have broken WP:1RR. Unless you can reply to the complaint and promise not to continue, a block seems likely. EdJohnston (talk) 05:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response at WP:AN3. If you intend not to touch the political side of Wikipedia again, does that mean you will abstain from Fancy Bear as well? That article does mention hacking Hillary Clinton's emails so it should be viewed as a political article. EdJohnston (talk) 14:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was just trying to get a citation there which agreed with what the article was saying. I feel like "alleged hacking" with an article cited which says "alleged hacking" is a pretty good outcome. I haven't checked the article since then. Daviddodecree (talk) 21:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)