User talk:LemonPie00

May 2022
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Llll5032 (talk) 19:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm TheoCourt. I noticed that you recently removed content from Democracy in China without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. While it's true that mass surveillance does not make a country inherently undemocratic and that it is committed by other countries including the US, it's still relevant to mention in the article. Theo (talk)  16:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi again. You seem to have undone my revert on your edit to Democracy in China. I'm of the opinion that this change shouldn't be made without consensus on the talk page. Please discuss it there. Thanks! Theo (talk)  17:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Adrian Zenz shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Czello 12:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Notices
— Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:46, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

— Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:46, 22 May 2022 (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. — Czello 12:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Enjoy your ban Czello. LemonPie00 (talk) 12:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Given multiple warnings, and the fact you have achieved this in less than a month tells me it is you who will get a sanction. wp:npa is a policy, as is wp:consensus and you are violating both of those. Our policies are not optional, you are required to obey them. Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Imagine having to reach consensus on whether or not Adrian Zenz’s page should include his homophobic views, just to avoid bias and him being painted as a saint.

If “discussion” and “consensus” is needed just to make sure his homophobic views are covered, then this is just disgusting.

Imagine being homophobic in this day and age. LemonPie00 (talk) 16:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Its called policy, and you need to read wp:blp (also a policy). As well as wp:or and wp:rs. Slatersteven (talk) 16:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. 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:. Daniel Case (talk) 04:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)