User talk:Eric MacEachern

February 2023
Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:35, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. I do not want to edit any articles just yet. I just wanted to make my intentions clear first. I would like to re-post the comment I made on talk page elsewhere after I have completed the tutorial. This is a time sensitive subject, so the longer I wait to make a comment, the less plausible my story will seem. Now that other users have seen my comment, I will complete the training and use the proper page for my comment. As you know, Wikipedia can be quite intimidating for new users and editors who are not familiar with its rules, guidelines, and culture. Eric MacEachern (talk) 21:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

About your email
Hello again Eric MacEachern. So the question is that it seems that you don't understand the mechanism of Wikipedia. It isn't designed to be formed by someone's own knowledge, it is designed to be formed by a number of sources - and in most cases, the most reliable sources. You may say that MSM is b******t, but till now MSM are the most widely used things here. If you really want to do something, try to get in touch with a correspondent from the media. Cheers. ときさき  くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 22:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Okay, thank you. Do you know of a reliable Internet based journalist who I could contact? The web is full of liars and scammers, so if you could throw me a life line I would really appreciate it. Eric MacEachern (talk) 22:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not that familiar with English medias, so I guess I can't. But normally if you see some medias that you think might be good, you could always click the "Contact Us" button. ときさき   くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 23:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Tokisaki Kurumi. (｡･ω･)ﾉＡＲＩＧＡＴＯ♪.+ﾟ*｡:ﾟ+🌟 Eric MacEachern (talk) 01:09, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This is WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH on a WP:FRINGE idea. It's a conspiracy theory at that, that you are saying this didn't happen. Best just to drop it, it won't have any mention on Wikipedia.
 * , I haven't any experience with a conspiracy theorist, trying to spread their beliefs on Wikipedia. What's the right way here? soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It looks like their intentions are incompatible with how Wikipedia functions. I imagine either they'll learn that Wikipedia isn't the place for them to "set the record straight" and willingly take it to Reddit or Twitter or somewhere else that tolerates this, or they'll be blocked for not being here to write an encyclopedia, which will likely happen relatively quickly because they're editing extremely high profile, popular articles. Sergecross73   msg me  13:12, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Now I think everything's clear, and I think it's good to discuss a bit further about this. A great reason for me is that I think we should treat newcomers friendly even if they may prompt something unreliable (as long as they don't insist that it should be directly changed in the article). On the one hand, I believe that Wikipedia should be used to change someone's mind, and to change the mind one important point is that they have to repudiate some claims before they accept them. On the other hand, I don't think that if someone believes one fringe belief, then this guy is "out of control" and can not do anything positive to the Wikipedia, especially for the newbies. ときさき   くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 09:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)