User talk:Pages777

Moving biographies to cases
Hi Pages777,

I notice you have recently moved several biographies to articles names that end with the word "cases" using the justification it is a legal case. In the Haleigh Poutre case, I have moved the article back to its original title for several reasons. We have guidelines to name articles involving Deaths and crimes as well as where these involve a single notable event or are legal cases. Also, please look at the guideline WP:TITLECHANGES. Essentially, once an article moves beyond the Stub stage, it should not be moved unless this is discussed first and long standing titles should not be changed without good reasons. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oops. I did not notice that Poutre was still alive. Maybe she will do something notable someday. Good call. I am pretty sure that in the other cases the people are dead and they are not otherwise notable. The reason I made the other name changes is for ease of identifying similar cases in the categories, such as Category:Medical controversies in the United States and Category:Euthanasia in the United States. I think of this "ease of use" issue as a pretty good reason. I guess we could talk about using a "Case of" prefix rather than a "case" suffix, if you want. There is some precedent for that. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Case+of&namespace=0 . The suffix has the advantage of having more than one type, such as O. J. Simpson murder case and O. J. Simpson robbery case. For trials, there is also the "Trial of" prefix, e.g. Trial of Michael Jackson, but again, you can only have one of those unless you get creative. The articles I added a "case" suffix to are all medical+legal cases and I tried to keep the article name short.--Pages777 (talk) 05:18, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Please contribute to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (violence and deaths)/Archive 1.--Pages777 (talk) 17:41, 4 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Just saw where you are wholesale changing article and talk page titles to "Case of" and I'd really like to ask you to please get some feedback from the community at large about this?TeeVeeed (talk) 19:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021, Terri Schiavo
Hello, I'm Larry Hockett. 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 Terri Schiavo case 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. Larry Hockett (Talk) 13:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Larry Hockett (Talk) 14:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Terri Schiavo case. This isn't as bad as the previous issue with the edit that discussed cavemen, but there are still too many non-neutral descriptors for an encyclopedia (a few examples: incompetent, irrational, steadfastly). Larry Hockett (Talk) 22:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abuse of editing privileges. 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:. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

In addition to pushing a point of view in an extremely aggressive fashion on the talk page, and edit warring, you are also using personal attacks to bludgeon the other side of the debate.

This is not okay and if it continues after this block you will get a longer block. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:57, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Since you have decided to engage in block evasion I have increased the block length to 2 weeks. No editing while blocked, even if you change users or IP. If you do that again I will make the block indefinite. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 04:22, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

, I would suggest looking at some of Pages777's recent edits to Constitutionality [] and Police Brutality []. The second one in particular is adding unsourced content. I also suspect that IP editor 75.128.18.70 and user Pen3guin [] may be the same editor based on their overlap in articles. Springee (talk) 17:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I am following the practices now and getting ready for consensus building. Please see Talk:Terri Schiavo case.--Pages777 (talk) 20:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Oath of office
Hello, I'm Ifnord. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Oath of office, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Ifnord (talk) 17:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Oath of office. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Ifnord (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I did some research and I now admit that I was wrong. Please see Talk:Oath of office.--Pages777 (talk) 20:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alerts
Vaticidalprophet 23:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Sock puppetry investigation
Please see Sockpuppet investigations/Pages777 where you are being investigated for engaging in sock puppetry. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 21:10, 24 July 2021 (UTC)