User talk:Docupeter

June 2022
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, The Grayzone. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. >>> Ingenuity . talk ; 14:19, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry, newbie here. "What follows in this entry below is almost entirely disinformation and needs to be replaced" This is not opinion. The same goes for most of the entry which is almost entirely made up of opinion and has no basis in fact whatsoever. It makes WikiLeaks look like a security state propaganda puppet. The content I replaced in the small description is from the Grayzone's about page: The Grayzone is an independent news website dedicated to original investigative journalism and analysis on politics and empire. - where is the opinion in that? - I would like to open up for debate in talk mode this entry to separate the facts from opinions. Pleas advise if this possible. Thank you. Docupeter (talk) 18:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to The Grayzone, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry, newbie here. I did not think to communicate as to why I made the deletion. I expressed that with my insertion: What follows in this entry is almost entirely disinformation and needs to be replaced. The same goes for what I removed in the short description which is entirely made up of opinion and has no basis in fact whatsoever. It makes Wikipedia look like a security state propaganda puppet. The content is replaced with actual facts, from the Grayzone's about page: The Grayzone is an independent news website dedicated to original investigative journalism and analysis on politics and empire. - where is the opinion in that? Docupeter (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)