User talk:John 3:16-17

April 2020
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Criticism of the Food and Drug Administration, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''Find better sources. The Fodder is an unreliable one-sided blog; sources need to be neutral and reliable per WP:RS. '' Zefr (talk) 16:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Criticism of the Food and Drug Administration, you may be blocked from editing. ''Use high-quality reviews rather than blogs; see WP:RS. '' Zefr (talk) 16:27, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Zefr response
First off, "The Fodder" doesn't exist. The website is titled "The Daily Fodder." Secondly, Wikipedia allows The New York Times, MSNBC, and CNN, in addition to The Washington Times, Fox News, and other conservative outlets. The Daily Fodder is about as biased as any of them. It is libertarian, as is Reason Magazine, another "reliable source." Next time you make a change please actually read what you've changed. You'll notice I also cited Reason Magazine, The Washington Times, and the American Institute for Economic Research, in addition to the Wall Street Journal. They all reported the same thing The Daily Fodder did. So it isn't much of an unreliable source.
 * The Daily Fodder, Reason Magazine, Washington Times, Fox News, American Institute for Economic Research, and other conservative outlets are all partisan publications that do not meet WP:RS standards; some are listed on WP:CITEWATCH as unreliable sources for the encyclopedia. You are not taking a neutral view, and will get blocked from editing if you persist. Remember to sign your talk page comments with four tildes. Zefr (talk) 16:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Criticism of the Food and Drug Administration. ''The process is to go to the talk page to gain consensus if you think this content and your sources are valid, not to edit war. You are now at WP:3RR and in danger of a block by admin. '' Zefr (talk) 16:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * on my talk page you said: "I did not add any defamatory content to FDA. You repeatedly ignore what I have written and have substituted reality for your own delusional narrative. I cited a whole host of organizations that back the other one I cited. I cited multiple sources wikipedia deems reliable. Just because you do not agree with what the sources say, that doesn't mean the sources are unreliable. But here's a few more, just because you have no idea what a fact seems to be:

https://observer.com/2020/04/n95-face-mask-shortage-fda-authorize-alternative-china-kn95/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/03/technology/coronavirus-masks-shortage.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-americas-mask-crunch-a-slow-government-reaction-and-an-industry-wary-of-liability/2020/04/02/b3155e2a-6f85-11ea-aa80-c2470c6b2034_story.html All the above sources say the same thing as the other ones I've cited. So my sources clearly are reliable, but your editing doesn't seem to be."
 * You're taking reports out of context concerning the FDA. These sources and others indicate the directive about masks is at the president's or DHHS level, not the FDA. Most of this is news, WP:NOTNEWS and/or WP:RECENTISM. It is not encyclopedic content at present for criticisms of the FDA, so just wait until the whole story becomes clearer, rather than making it a news report. Zefr (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Kinu t/c 19:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)