User talk:MrLag525

Post-1992 American politics sanctions alert
And for the record, we're not at all interested in your conspiracy theories. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm not interested in your Liberal biased. So screw off, fatso. MrLag525 (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * also, its not a fringe theory, I just hope that wikipedia shows both sides of the US, not just the Democratic side. MrLag525 (talk) 14:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * We do show that.  starship .paint  (exalt) 06:14, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If you did, you would mention President Joe Biden's shortcomings, such as idiotically taking our troops out of Ukraine instead of the citzens. Allowing Ukraine to be taken over. Also, you should also mention in your Donald Trump article, the many recent polls and surveys conducted recently that rank Trump highly, and rank Biden terribly. And on biden's article again, you dont write info on his dissapproval rating which is TERRIBLE right now. Also, I find it funny that you guys took down my post, since this is a country of free speech. (Or, it was anyway) MrLag525 (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has many policies and guidelines which you appear to be unaware of, please read some of them, especially WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:RS, before making your next edit. Your page was deleted because, despite your claim that it violated no policy, it violated a policy. You appear to be admit that you made your claim that no policy was violated without actually knowing if that is true. This is Wikipedia, not the United States of America. There is no free speech on Wikipedia and the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States does prevent any individual, group, or organization from limiting your speech, it only prevents the government of the United States from limiting your speech. In fact, by limiting speech on a platform, the owners of that platform are exercising their own freedom of speech.
 * Talk pages are intended to be used to help improve Wikipedia. You are currently blocked from editing because it was determined that your editing does not improve Wikipedia. Using Wikipedia as a social network does not improve Wikipedia. You are able to edit your talk page so that you can request to be unblocked. If, after familiarizing yourself with Wikipedia's policies, you wish to improve Wikipedia while following those policies, including by making articles more neutral, you can request an unblock. If instead you continue to use your talk page to complain while showing a clear lack of knowledge of Wikipedia's policies, your ability to edit your talk page will be removed. Again, while you are blocked the intention of your talk page access is to allow you to appeal the block.  02:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Or, to put what PhantomTech said in re free speech in a more direct form, see here. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 21:37, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem is that Freedom of Speech doesn't exsist if everything is biased. If I made an article on how terrible Trump is, I don't think I would get flagged at all. The problem is that YOU are controlling what others see, which means YOU influence what they think. Instead of only certain opinions being shown, I believe that all sides of the argument should be shown so the reader can see all of them and come up with their own conclusion. MrLag525 (talk) 22:46, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not controlling shit. I don't edit in the American politics topic area if I can help it, due to people like you. And to take the whataboutism to its fullest extent, are you alleging that the conservative editors, some of whom are Trump fans, who work in the topic area with no issues whatsoever are part of this grand pro-Biden conspiracy? —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 22:51, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Chill. I'm just someone who notices fringe crap and wants it corrected. MrLag525 (talk) 23:05, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem is that YOU are controlling what others see, which means YOU influence what they think. This you? —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 23:07, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * When I say YOU I mean Wikipedia in general. (prob should have clarified that) MrLag525 (talk) 23:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am improving wikipedia, I just want everything about Joe Biden to be on his wikipedia page, not just his (minimal) success's. When you go to Joe Biden's page, there is almost nothing bad listed about him on the page. Comes off as kinda biased. I want wikipedia to show both sides of the argument, not just your argument. MrLag525 (talk) 22:36, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You are having no impact on articles on Wikipedia by refusing to read any of Wikipedia's policy and ranting about how biased Wikipedia is. Your continued arguments about free speech after an explanation of why those arguments cannot be applied here will not impact Wikipedia's articles in any way. This is the last reminder you will get from me: your ability to edit this page exists to allow you to request an unblock, not to claim you are improving Wikipedia while making arguments that demonstrate you did not read and understand what you are replying to. If you want to improve Wikipedia, prove it by reading Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and requesting an unblock so that you can attempt to make the articles you are complaining about more neutral instead of complaining to editors who have likely had no involvement in the content of those articles.  23:02, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Fine, then wikipedia is not a site meant for someone to find info on, since the info is controlled. It is a site that brainless bozos go to to find fringe info for some college essay. MrLag525 (talk) 23:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The issue here is you want to use Wikipedia as a partisan battleground to try and create and control a narrative, one that has already been discussed to death by editors who aren't blind partisans and is a settled matter. We're not interested in yet another fucking American political partisan who can't shut up and won't change the subject, even if it's to their benefit to do so. I also note you didn't answer my question about conservative/Trump-friendly Wikipedia editors, which suggests you don't have a cogent argument other than "whaaa donkey" and have no interest in actually engaging with other editors who are collegial but hold contrary points of view to your own. You're undermining your whole freedom of speech argument with these responses of yours, which cry censorship as if it's an actual defence of your position. Maybe think more about trying to put forward an actual argument instead of just giving up and trying to shut down any criticism with whatever -ism you find fashionable. It doesn't work, and it annihilates your entire argument. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 23:24, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Bruh, im not shutting down critisism, I'm just not letting it affect me, unlike you who is clearly getting a bit heated. MrLag525 (talk) 00:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:MrLag525/sandbox


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:MrLag525/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * @MrLag525 And while this page doesn't violate any of wikipedias policies or copyrights they will still find an excuse to take this down You should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before making claims like this.  19:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * fair, fair, but I request that wikipedia also lists Joe Biden's shortcomings, as well as Trump's achivenments. MrLag525 (talk) 14:36, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * We do describe those.  starship .paint  (exalt) 06:14, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Really, then where on Biden's page do they mention how he idiotically took out our solders from Ukraine instead of the citizens, and how that led to Ukraine being taken over? MrLag525 (talk) 22:38, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * also they did take it down lol MrLag525 (talk) 14:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is MrLag525. Thank you. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
 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:. GeneralNotability (talk) 18:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

MrLag525 (talk) 22:52, 10 September 2022 (UTC)