User talk:Magnumb22

August 2018
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Teahouse, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment, or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button Signature icon april 2018.png located above the edit window.

Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 00:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

October 2018
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Jennifer Keesmaat. Thank you. KH-1 (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

December 2018
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. 331dot (talk) 11:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

June 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:57, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Are you serious,  Literally everything that I have written in relation to Lady Gaga and Cynthia Bissett Germanotta is based on the highest level source material. Therefore how am I disruptively editing? Magnumb22 (talk) 02:20, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The problem is you haven't provided in-text citations that actually support the claims you've made on their heritage. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:28, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I tried but I don’t know how, but I have the links and sources... Magnumb22 (talk) 02:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The page WP:Citing sources should be helpful. SNUGGUMS (talk / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 03:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Can I ask if you have ever done genealogical research? Magnumb22 (talk) 21:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Episcopal
"Episcopalian is a noun, and it refers to belonging to the Episcopal Church. Members of the Episcopal Church are Episcopalians, not Episcopals." (see here) Next time, perhaps you can provide proper sources with inline citations instead of becoming defensive about your disruptive editing. Accusing other editors of lacking knowledge on the English language is rude and immature. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Might I also suggest you read some Marx :) Magnumb22 (talk) 21:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I suggest you read through Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before editing articles. :) -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:26, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Lady Gaga
Hi. I'm not sure what your problem with me is but I never claimed to have any knowledge about genealogy. I am however an experienced Wikipedia contributor, and I know which edits are unacceptable especially when it comes to featured articles. I never said your claims regarding Gaga's ancestry were wrong, but you need to provide a reliable in-text citation, which you did not. That is the only reason why I reverted your edit (it was one edit by the way, so I'm confused about your comment suggesting edit warring). I can understand that it's frustrating having your edits reverted but we cannot allow unsourced content on Wikipedia. You saying it's true is not good enough. I'll leave it at that. ArturSik (talk) 18:26, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Ok but I did provide a source two infact and if you were to read the article on Perche Quebec (a French-Canadian genealogical website). I’m not sure how its not a reliable source when far less reliable “sources” like Perez Hilton’s sites are sometimes sourced… How is a Quebec based genealogy site not a valid if not top source for information on the genealogy of someone who may or may not be (in this case not) French-Canadian? I’m just frustrated because like I said I’ve been doing her genealogy for a few years and have tried to get the correct information on her genealogy known. Most importantly however is the current source for her “French-Canadian” roots is a washington post opinion article that doesn’t seem to mention her ancestry anywhere? If it does and I’m missing it let me know please. I’m mostly frustrated because something akin to this happened before with another editor and when I asked them to offer me advice for how to prove the information I had for wiki’s requirement’s they were no help. So I would really appreciate someone helping me in this dilemma since maybe it’s not a big deal for some but accurate genealogical information is a big deal for me. Thank you! Magnumb22 (talk) 21:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Alexa Demie
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page. --Hipal (talk) 15:49, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

How have I violated policy? Thank you. Magnumb22 (talk) 16:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you don't understand the problems you're causing, I suggest you avoid WP:BLP content completely. Sanctions apply, so ignorance is no excuse for continuing. --Hipal (talk) 18:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Listen if there was an issue I was causing you have the ability to be more specific and you haven’t so in all honesty you are just causing more conflict. Magnumb22 (talk) 20:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Read the policies cited. WP:BLP is enforced by sanctions per WP:DSTOPICS. Don't use references that are unsuitable for a BLP. If you are having difficulty determining the suitability of a reference, it is helpful to check WP:RSP and WP:RSN. --Hipal (talk) 20:43, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Using California Birth Index or similar references for BLP information
Hi Magnumb22.

You wrote : "How is The Birth Index not to be used as a source on articles for individuals? What is the logic and reason behind this. Because the only reason I can think of is “privacy” though that doesn’t really explain it as anyone can look up someone on the index. Magnumb22 (talk) 03:48, 23 February 2022 (UTC)"

Article talk pages are for discussions on improving that specific article, so I've moved your comment here.

I've already partially answered your question by providing you links to WP:BLP, WP:RSP, WP:RSN. BLP is a lengthy policy, strictly enforced. In it you'll find WP:BLPPRIMARY and WP:BLPPRIVACY, which should clearly answer why such primary sources should not be used. --Hipal (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2022 (UTC)