User talk:Socal23

Thanks for your california contribution, as it is valid and clearly states real and verifiable sources. Unfortunately, since wikipedia is only for incorrect, false information (valid and true information is deleted from wikipedia immediately, because the unemployed moderators with no friends are also trolls), people are starting more and more to stop using this site, so your contributions will eventually be useless.

I'm already blocked from editing if all you do is keep reverting any changes I make back to the false information that was there before. So why should I care if I flame or not or listen to anything you have to say if you refuse to accept any contributions either way? I spent several hours fixing errors in the article and finding valid sources from only reputable sites like the official page and the california secretary of state website. However, due to the fact the moderator didn't agree with six californias in the first place, he lied and said I didn't use valid sources and reverted it back to the biased, false article that was there before, making me have wasted hours of my time trying to help people not be manipulated by lying wikipedia moderators. Obviously, you don't give a f u c k about valid information. All you want to do is push your own agendas.


 * I'm sorry you feel that way. Yes, you did add real and verifiable sources. The problem is that you reached or implied a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of those sources. That is a "synthesis of published material". Now if you help me find a real and verifiable source that explicitly states that the initiative did not entirely failed, and that there was "widespread misinformation", or news writers "clearly did not check sources or do simple math", then I can add your edits back then. But until then, others will want to revert it back. Again, these conclusions need to have been published by a reliable source someplace else before it is added to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses of real and verifiable sources, or to publish new information, whether it is true or not. I cannot re-add your conclusions unless another reliable source explicitly repeats the same things, and I can specifically add citations to those conclusions. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)