User talk:Speakeasysky

April 2013
Hello, I'm Yintan. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Kryptos, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks,  Yintan ²   18:57, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Do i seriously have to write this reply in markup? LOL when is wikipedia going to come up with a WYSIWYG?

Anyway I'm not using markup because I'm too important. Here's what I have to say Yintan: It's not my problem that you don't trust the source as being reputable. Why don't you ask a few of the source's friends if he is reputable if you have a problem trusting it? A facebook post is just as reputable as all of those news sites that post twitter posts for their news.

~ Speakeasysky (talk) 19:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Yintan ²  19:10, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Yintan ²  19:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

The word "source" in Wikipedia has three meanings: the type of the work (some examples include a document, an article, or a book), the creator of the work (for example, the writer), and the publisher of the work (for example, Oxford University Press). All three can affect reliability. Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form). Unpublished materials are not considered reliable. Use sources that directly support the material presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. The best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments. The greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Be especially careful when sourcing content related to living people or medicine. Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science. You may also use material from reliable non-academic sources, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include university-level textbooks, books published by respected publishing houses, magazines, journals, and mainstream newspapers. You may also use electronic media, subject to the same criteria. See details in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Search engine test.

Facebook has a legal team.

Facebook has peer review (comments)

Suck a big one.

~ Speakeasysky (talk) 19:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

This is your last and only warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Kryptos. Yintan ²  19:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

This is your last and only warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Kryptos. Lugia2453 (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Kinu t/c 20:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts
Lugia2453 (talk) 21:06, 13 April 2013 (UTC)