User talk:MaosMao

Welcome!
Hello, MaosMao, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Lewisburg, West Virginia did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 20:55, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

September 2019
Hello, I'm Wallyfromdilbert. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Carlos Maza, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 22:13, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Hello, I'm Sabbatino. Your recent edit to the page Dante Exum appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so it has been removed for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:04, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

You are correct. My apologies. If it is confirmed though, please reset the page to my edits if you are available. MaosMao (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

April 2022
Your recent editing history at Josh Mandel 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. 331dot (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

If sources describe Mr. Mandel as far right, then Wikipedia does too. If you have independent reliable sources that describe former President Trump as far right, or Senator Sanders as far left, please offer them on their respective talk pages. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I could provide hundreds of sources that call President Trump far-right, a fascist, a Nazi, etc., but that does not make that assertion true. I don't care about Josh Mandel, I really don't, it is about consistency. It is not correct formatting to assert a politician's supposed views in the first sentence of an article unless they are outside the mainstream, and there's no reason to put Mandel outside of that. Socialists such as members of the "Squad", whose views align with those of European political parties that are labeled "far-left", do not have that described in their first sentence. This is simply a specific attack, for what reason I have no clue, against a completely mainstream politician, that goes against Wikipedia precedent. I invite you to prove me wrong. MaosMao (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Marjorie Taylor Greene, Mark Finchem, David Duke, Justin Barrett, and a significant amount of others have their far-right views described in the first line. There's four examples, of which there's significantly more. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 16:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

331dot (talk) 15:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)