User talk:Whitecatwearinghat

jp made retaliatory warnings and block threats on my account were added after I criticized revert edits regurgitating white male supremacist political propaganda on the pages of living public official bios and erasing well-sourced, unsensationalized genocide history then blocking its editor. Both subjects are involved in current political controversy. They involve extremely violent, traumatic histories and demand sensitive, researched treatment by administrators and editors.

1) On the pages of two living public officials, jp and jp reverted content that should be deleted. The edits were inserted by an anonymous account with fingerprints of the politician himself related to a controversy that killed an anti-violence against women and children bill on the days of the final vote toward passage in the Louisiana legislature. The edits crib white male supremacist propaganda campaigns, made by an IP address with fingerprints of politician or his reps self-editing his own page and his political opponent's page. The anonymous edits contained: >>Challenged claims that are supported purely by primary or self-published sources or those with an apparent conflict of interest; >>Reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character or against an interest they had previously defended; >>Likely libel on issues subject to a criminal investigation and prospective litigation >>Not properly researched or provided in context via multiple sources and perspectives such be neutral or avoid sensationalization

Wikipedia's policy is clear that these edits should be removed, so I made edits and reverts to delete, as per Wikipedia policy.

2) The page on the assassination of a key figure in the Armenian Genocide, jp deleted an edit that added one accurate, duplicitously sourced sentence. jp gave an untrue reason for their deletion that it was unsourced. The sentence was confirmed in multiple sources in the page's references section (and is common knowledge to those up-to-date with the history of the Armenian Genocide). The sources in the pages references section are high quality: history books and academic articles. jp proceeded to vigorously defend their erasure of this history and deflect criticism of their edits.

Subsequently, jp and participated in a ganging up of editors to block and bully. the editor who added one accurate, well-sourced sentence to page that was written in some of the most neutral language on the page yet. without sensationalization, imputing opinion or spreading patriotic myths about the assassin or his targets (as is common in this history). Edits to the page have been becoming more and more sensationalized and biased, with factual inaccuracies, in an apparent disinformation campaign on this history. jp also addressed me with dismissive language on their Talk page and falsely accused me of trying to delete something I just don't like. True, I'm not in favor of white male supremacist editing by politicians for their own self-interest. However, this also violates Wikipedia policy.