User talk:OURFreedomofSPEECH

January 2021
Hello, I'm Sdrqaz. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Post-election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sdrqaz (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

If you again remove reliably-sourced material from the above-referenced article, you will likely be blocked from editing. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 01:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I could gather an equal amount of sources to back up my position but it wouldn't matter in your opinion. I really don't care about the subject. Just wanted to know how decrepit people are when it comes to freedom of speech and the few people that have reacted has proven my point. You don't allow for any other point of view but your own and threaten people when they don't line up with how you think. It just shows how bad the situation is and how freedom of speech is regulated by people like you. OURFreedomofSPEECH (talk) 01:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to present reliable sources on the talk page, you're welcome to do so. The rest of your grandstanding is irrelevant. We aren't a free speech zone and you have no free speech here. We're a project to build an encyclopedia based upon reliable sources, and if you choose not to abide by our rules and processes, you'll be invited to go elsewhere. Have a nice day. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 01:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

There are reliable source but as I said it wouldn't matter to you. Grandstanding is what you are doing. As I said I have no interest in the topic. I wanted to find out from myself if the censoring of speech was true and it is. There is an opposite argument to what YOU have here and it's not natural. Pretending it is natural is grandstanding. OURFreedomofSPEECH (talk) 01:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)


 * If these reliable sources exist, prove it. I find it unlikely that you have no interest in the topic, as you've edited that page three times in half an hour. There are counterarguments to everything, but that does not automatically mean that they are valid. Sdrqaz (talk) 01:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is governed by reliable sources. A list of them can be found at WP:RSPSOURCES. If you are able to find a reliable source that backs your point up, then it'll be suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Sdrqaz (talk) 01:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

As I said before it was to confirm rumors I have been hearing on other forum's. I doubt others have not given sources. The problem with your point of view is that YOU determine what is reliable. Which makes it mute for me to even try. I have no I interest as I have accepted the election results. I merely point out a one sided point of view that is not NATURAl as you claim. If anyone had given reliable sources they would be posted for all to see but my guess is what ever is given as a source is deemed unreliable. As hot a topic that this is I have yet to see any natural post on this site. There is no need to continue replying as I will not be providing sources. Thank you both for responding and goodnight! OURFreedomofSPEECH (talk) 02:04, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry made a type-0. OURFreedomofSPEECH (talk) 02:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notice
NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 01:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Post-election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Love of Corey (talk) 01:29, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.