User talk:Sleepflower70

May 2022
Hello, I'm Smallangryplanet. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Graham Linehan have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Smallangryplanet (talk) 17:26, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Graham Linehan. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sideswipe9th (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert - gender and sexuality, biography of living persons
Sideswipe9th (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

What is the point of Wikipedia if you can lie? It may suit your narrative but it is potentially libelous. Sleepflower70 (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2022 (UTC)


 * On Wikipedia, everything we write is based upon what reliable secondary sources say about a given subject or topic. In the case of Graham Linehan, there is strong consensus within those sources that he is an anti-transgender activist. If you have an issue with what the sources, including media organisations, human rights organisations, charities, researchers, and authors, are saying about Graham, you may wish to contact them and try to get them to issue a correction. However unless and until those sources issue such a correction, we will continue to use whatever language is used by reliable sources on Graham.
 * I would also suggest that you are very careful with how you use legal terms on Wikipedia, as there is a policy of No legal threats that applies to talk pages and edit summaries. I do recognise though that you haven't made a threat, I just wanted to make you, as a new editor, aware of that policy. Sideswipe9th (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

August 2023
Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Andrea Long Chu, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. MOS:GENDERID is very clear: Wikipedia uses the preferred pronouns of the subject of the article; we do not change pronouns according to how the subject identified at a given point in their life. —C.Fred (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 19:56, 1 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is full of inaccurate information. Its clear that the people that write these contributions control the narrative. Any edits that are factually correct are dismissed because you have full control of what's printed. If I wanted to find out anything of worth about a subject or person, I would not be using Wikipedia. Sleepflower70 (talk) 20:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)