User talk:PatNPatN

Hi !
Hi —I think you've got some good ideas. But having been here for awhile, I think I can tell you that you are going to end up being blocked or banned. You can't just edit a Talk page to your liking. I'm referring to edits like this. I can't get into the details and I'm not even sure what ultimately the details are, but I think I am advising you well when I say you should edit slowly and tentatively. And observe what other people do very carefully. Otherwise what is going to happen is someone is going to block or ban you, which is a hassle, and best avoided. All the best. Bus stop (talk) 19:53, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hey —It seems like there's a monopoly on what can be used as sources and what can't? I'm still trying to get around this whole platform who isn't user friendly.


 * —Where did you click to see the edit history?


 * OK, good question—the "History" tab at the top will show edit history. On a separate note, I notice you sometimes don't sign your posts, therefore check out WP:SIGNATURES. Another good thing to know is WP:INDENTATION. Notice I've adjusted your indentation. You can also learn a lot just by scrutinizing other people's edits. Bus stop (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * (after edit conflict) As for sources, in my own words, preference is given to sources that are directly on-topic, meaning that if a good quality source draws a connection between the topic of an article and something (such as stun guns) the information in that source arguably warrants a place in the article. But a source only talking about stun guns, but not in relation to the Rayshard Brooks incident, may not be allowable. But there is often a lot of argumentation about many of these points. Bus stop (talk) 20:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks brother. If you don't mind, I have another question for you regarding wikipedia articles heavily debated such has this one. For example, some mainstream news outlets might say that Rayshard Brooks was unarmed while others state that he was armed with a taser that was fired toward the officer. Who gets to decided which articles may be used or not (if they both come from "mainstream" media outlets)?PatNPatN (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * and I would probably want to ask: who decides what news outlet is considered credible or not? Is there a list of "approved reliable sources"? Etc...PatNPatN (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Contentious articles are different from non-contentious articles, most of the time. The news outlets also disagree with one another, often within the same news article. I don't think we decide whether one point of view is correct. We should aim to present both points of view, probably drawing upon several sources. This is the area of WP:NPOV, generally contentious. Bus stop (talk) 20:55, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The lack of rationality is confusing:
 * 1. The wikipedia article states that the taser war fired in the direction of the officer.
 * 2. The same District Attorney stated on 2 June 2020 in a different matter (Taniyah Pilgrim & Messiah Young) that tasers are considered deadly weapons.
 * 3. If a deadly weapon (taser) is fired at a police officer, why is there a debate regarding the use of lethal force at the suspect?
 * PatNPatN (talk) 21:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Is it not allowed to talk about certain source material in the "talk" section?PatNPatN (talk) 16:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

- Hey brother, I posted the following in the Talk page of the Rayshard Brooks shooting. Do you think someone could attempt to erase or suppress it? It is specifically not WP:Original researchPatNPatN (talk) 02:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * District Attorney's statement

"Those 2 elements should be included in the investigation sub-paragraph. They are not WP:Original research. Do not suppress or collapse.


 * In a press conference on 2 June 2020, Fulton's County District Attorney Paul Howard stated that, quote: "Stun guns are considered deadly weapons".


 * According to ABC News, quote: "[...] the Atlanta Police Department Policy Manuel regarding the use of force, specifically one governing what officers can and cannot do to apprehend a suspect. The rule reads that lethal force can only be used if an officer "reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury and when he or she reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of serious bodily injury to the officer or others." . PatNPatN (talk) 02:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Your email
In general, users should avoid communicating "behind the scenes" via email. The reason the thread is "collapsed" is that what you were doing is considered WP:Original research, and therefore not an acceptable basis for article content. If you click the [show] button on the collapsed box all the text is still there. And inside there you'll see my post explaining why looking at statutes to try to figure out what the law really is is a no-no. There are a lot of rules around here, and it takes a while to get used to them, but they're there for a reason. EEng 20:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hey—indeed there's a lot of customs around here. Regarding the discussion thread I created, am I allowed to remove the content that I posted (only the content that I entered)?PatNPatN (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry for butting in. Hi PatNPatN. See WP:TALK for some information on when you can alter or remove your own posts. Basically, once someone has responded to your post, you should not alter it, except in minor ways. Bus stop (talk) 20:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * PatN, please do not email me unless it's a highly confidential matter involving privacy violations or something like that. My answer is the same as before -- see my post at the start of this thread. EEng 16:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * - I made a separate thread for the "Paul Howard statement" specifically because it was sourced from news outlet (as opposed to my first thread ever made on Wikipedia about "Stun guns and tasers" that was indeed based on Original Research...my mistake). I don't want both of my thread to be under the same umbrella. The "Paul Howard statement" subsection shouldn't be hidden.PatNPatN (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It's still original research. Howard's statement was made in the context of a different case with different facts. Just as "firearm" has different definitions in different situations, so might (as far as you or I know) "deadly weapon". Look at it this way. Suppose a doctor, testifying in a murder trial, says "5 mg of drug X would be lethal". Then the same doctor testifies in another trial, "10 mg of drug X could not be lethal". You might say, Aha! He's contradicting himself. But not if the first case involved an infant and the second case involved a 300-pound man. This is why we don't take stuff from one situation and report it in articles about other situations. EEng 18:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * - Morphine is classified as a narcotic/opioïde/controlled substance/etc. Its classification won't change regardless of dosage or circumstances with a specific patient. The classification of a Stun gun (or any weapon) doesn't change based on the situation it's involved in. Paul Howard stated that Stun guns are considered "deadly weapons"... PatNPatN (talk) 01:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but your simplistic, inexpert statements that this or that won't change based on the situation or won't change regardless of circumstances are just that: simplistic, inexpert statements. For example, Georgia statutes define firearm in different ways for different purposes e.g. 16-11-131 defines firearm as "any handgun, rifle, shotgun, or other weapon which will or can be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or electrical charge", whereas § 16-11-133 defines the same word as "any handgun, rifle, shotgun, stun gun, taser, or other weapon which will or can be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or electrical charge". Maybe in the end those end up being the same thing, maybe not – and that's for informed sources to explicate, not you or me to armchair-opine on. That's why we don't allow WP:Original research. EEng 03:41, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Killing of Rayshard Brooks
Hi, do you have any thoughts regarding the changes at Talk:Killing_of_Rayshard_Brooks? Sorry I didn't ping you earlier as an involved editor - keeping track of everyone on that page is challenging...FirstPrimeOfApophis (talk) 06:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Good morning, I try to be involved as much as I can. PatNPatN (talk) 12:49, 16 July 2020 (UTC)