User talk:RDWebster

Welcome!
Hello, RDWebster, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Absolute Proof does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below 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
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 17:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)


 * That's odd, as I was correcting misinformation that created a negative point of view not justified by the content of Absolute Truth. As a mathematician who watched the documentary closely, I can certify that the conclusions drawn from the evidence, of massive fraud in heavily Democrat areas of just seven states during a time when vote tallying was halted (for no valid reason) that altered the real outcome of the 2020 presidential election to effectively create a cyber coup d'état and install an illegitimate regime.  Facts exposed by both Absolute Truth and 2000 Mules are undeniable, no matter how many "fact checkers" of no credibility deny the TRUTH.  Example:  Pennsylvania was won by Trump (handily) when he defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016.  Between 2016 and 2020 Republicans out-registered Democrats 21 to 1 in Pennsylvania.  Yet, with more than a quarter million vote lead at midnight, Trump's votes DECLINED as BIDEN's ballots soared in the dead of night when polls were closed and tallying had been suspended... and the corrupt cabal declared Biden the winner?  Nobody seriously believes that Biden won Pennsylvania (or many of the other highly suspicious key states where tallying was suspended for nor reason).  Biden's "election" is an untenable contention that cannot be supported by evidence; yet there is a mountain of evidence that indicates Trump actually won the "true" vote by a massive landslide, garnering the greatest vote tally in US history.  And I'm supposed to believe that a reasonable set of standards allows the non-neutral position that the 2020 election was the most fraud-free in US history?  Or that allowing the "raspberry awards" any place on your website is mature, adult, and "neutral"???  Really???
 * Unless I see some significant changes for the better, Wikipedia will no longer receive any donation from me.
 * Thank you for your "Welcome".RDWebster (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I apologize for triggering you during multiple exchanges back on 9 May 2022. I agree, it was not a place for debate.
 * I particularly appreciate your clarification: "Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media."
 * Therefore, I suggest the reference (below, #8.) to Mike Lindell as a "conspiracy theorist" be removed as it is clearly an opinion and an ad hominem attack not supportable by had facts.
 * 8. Colvin, Jill (June 26, 2021). "Trump airs old election grievances in return to rally stage". Associated Press. Archived from the original on July 28, 2021. Retrieved August 12, 2021. Mike Lindell, the My Pillow founder-turned-conspiracy theorist who has spent millions trying to prove the election was stolen... RDWebster (talk) 16:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

May 2022
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Absolute Proof, you may be blocked from editing.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 17:47, 9 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Then please cease your childish inclusion of garbage like the raspberry awards. And please stop denying truth for partisan reasons.  Truth and reality will always defeat subterfuge and lies.  Wikipedia needs to get itself on the TRUTH side of information and stop promoting disinformation, malinformation and misinformation.RDWebster (talk) 18:04, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @RDWebster Are you here to build an encyclopedia or to "expose the truth" (see WP:TRUTH). If the latter, I suggest you try a social media platform like Twitter.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 19:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * So is Truth immaterial, if it doesn't support your subjective view of "neutrality"? So reasonable views of evidence mean anything?  I'm all for helping "to build an encyclopedia" that is based on truth and an honest view of evidence.  Are you certain that is what you are committed to achieving?  If so, how does including "raspberry awards" support that mission?  Particularly when zero evidence supporting the appropriateness of such an "award" is presented.  Clearly, Wikipedia has a narrative about the 2020 election that is inconsistent with the evidence (see "2000 Mules").  Is it appropriate for an "encyclopedia" to violate its own "Neutral Point of View policy" by ignoring supportive evidence that the 2020 Election was tainted by the most fraud in the history of US elections?  Have you actually watched "Absolute Proof"?  "2000 Mules"?  Do either (both) of these give you ANY pause to consider that maybe your narrative might be fiction and the 2020 election fraud was sufficient to alter the outcome?  I note you continually fail to address salient questions... e.g., the Pennsylvania outcome that flies in the face of voter registrations during 2016-2020!RDWebster (talk) 19:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a place to litigate grievances about the 2020 election. And I certainly will not "address salient questions" as I am not here to discuss or debate with you the merits of those claims. If you think the Raspberry Awards should be removed, that is a completely legitimate suggestion to improve the article and you should suggest that on the article's talk page.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 15:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you EvergreenFir for a spirited exchange. I will suggest that change.  Thank you.RDWebster (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

August 2023
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. MrOllie (talk) 13:01, 31 August 2023 (UTC)