User talk:Kn0w-01

Proposed deletion of Urban-rural political divide


The article Urban-rural political divide has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Completely unsourced stub with no substance. This is simply a definition of a (controversial and not proven) political theory. Would need to be hugely fleshed out & sourced to be retained."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesG5 (talk) 02:10, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for addressing the issues with the article. RE your comment Whoever scheduled this for deletion is probably doing it for malicious political reasons. A 30 second Google search results in hundreds upon hundreds of articles on the subject. Rather that scheduling it for deletion, the correct action would be to not be lazy and insert the citations yourself rather than bother this engineer. Thanks. I'd like to clarify that there were no political issues (I'm not even sure what those would be in this case) but a structural one for how Wikipedia operates.  The idea behind creating new articles is that you put up a fully fleshed out ready to go article, with sources and material, so as not to clutter the system up by putting out a one or two sentence descriptor with no references and then hoping someone else will finish it.  If you're too busy to finish an article there are ways to create drafts and request help.  I also used a scheduled deletion and not a speedy (which would have seen it removed immediately) in order to give you a chance to fix it, but also pages tagged that way appear in pools where others can see them and give help if they feel it's worthwhile.  I personally didn't have time just then but I assumed someone would. JamesG5 (talk) 04:45, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Wingnut (politics), Orrin Hatch, Brett Kavanaugh
Wikipedia is not a place to vent personal opinions or publish opinionated, essay-style prose pieces. Kindly adhere to such policies as WP:NPOV, not to mention WP:BLP. And please be careful of editing in these wildly contentious areas: see templated note below. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

It is common for Wingnuts to be unable to discern Fact from Opinion. I know it's hard to read citations, but they are detailed by this engineer. I'm not the person who is supposed to write the history for the entire world here. It is your job to fact check, add, remove and modify sections and citations, not mine. You however are not entitled to your own facts.

September 2018
This is your only warning; if you add defamatory content to Wikipedia again, as you did at Brett Kavanaugh, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Make no mistake: your edits run counter to a half-dozen policies and guidelines, including the WP:BLP, and I will block you if you continue. Drmies (talk) 16:09, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "No this is a public Wiki and your not entitled to your own facts." -- "public Wiki" doesn't mean a thing. Not every edit is allowed. This stuff about someone not sharing values, that's not for here: you are obviously inserting your own opinion. Drmies (talk) 16:10, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

You have a very negative rating on Wikipedia and I have a very positive one. It's not defamatory to add a criticism section to a section on a public figure for office, but it is trying to influence an election by attempting to whitewash facts and not listing any criticism.
 * Your "criticism" was made with a clear attempt to reflect a point of view that wasn't neutral. Any further attempts to engage in disruptive editing behaviors or violate policy will result in being blocked.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:19, 4 September 2018 (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:.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   16:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * User:Oshwah, you're a Republican now? I guess I won't be seeing you anymore at the weekly Antifa meetings. Kn0w, your attempt to go for the silliest kind of ad hominem is not likely to be successful. Drmies (talk) 16:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I get called lots of different things on Wikipedia..... lol  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)

So apparently then on Wikipedia, you're not allowed to list any criticisms of politicians because you're not allowed to post facts. First off, why would the software let me revert changes if that was not allowed? That is a software bug, not my fault. I'm an engineer and in my world, the computer doesn't allow you to do that. I though it meant something else. Lets examine the Criticisms I posted:

1.) Brett Kavanaugh graduated from an Ivy League college and is not know to share the same values as the lower and middle classes. 2.) Democrats oppose Kavanaugh. 3.) Trump said he'd only nominate an anti-Roe-v-Wade Justice.

Which ones of these things is not factual? And if so, why don't you add Criticism of the Criticism section rather than try to whitewash facts in order to influence the Kavanaugh nomination?
 * You're not allowed to post your criticism, simple. My car can go 50 in a 25 zone, yet I shouldn't. Plenty of articles have "criticism", but usually those are well-verified by secondary sources and written neutrally. "Trump will only appoint an anti-Roe judge" is not even a criticism. Etc. Drmies (talk) 16:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk page access revoked. Another admin will be along shortly to review your unblock request. If that's declined, that leaves you with WP:UTRS. --Yamla (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2018 (UTC)