User talk:The Cleanup Kid
NOTE: Further phony warnings posted to my talk page will be removed without comment. The Cleanup Kid (talk) 04:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
UPDATE: I have been the target of harassment from a rogue administrator named Chris Howie, who has abused his admin status to block me when it is requested by a group of Wikibullies who violate WP:OWN and obsessively police various articles that have to do with professional wrestling. Evidence against this abusive admin is currently being collected for the purposes of a proper complaint. The Cleanup Kid (talk) 02:55, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Pontiac Silverdome[edit]
Please read WP:V. The statement in Pontiac Silverdome is referenced by multiple sources. It doesn't really matter if the statement is true or not, it's just whether or not sources can back it up. That's one of the basic tenants of Wikipedia. I tweaked the statement to say the record was set at that time. Please stop removing the sourced information. Thanks. — X96lee15 (talk) 04:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'll leave this here as a great example of ignorance. The Cleanup Kid (talk) 19:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please share what is incorrect. I'm only following Wikipedia guidelines. If the sources are not saying what the statement says, by all means change it, but removing it entirely isn't the proper thing to do. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- "It doesn't really matter if the statement is true or not, it's just whether or not sources can back it up." is not Wikipedia policy. The Cleanup Kid (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- First sentence of WP:V: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth..." WP:V is a Wikipedia policy. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- The issue has been discussed time and time again at WP:PW. Per WP:V and WP:RS the note stands. Any more issues regarding the subject should be taken up with WP:PW. Also note that you are in violation of WP:3RR. Any additional reverts to Pontiac Silverdome will result in your account being blocked from editing further.--UnquestionableTruth-- 20:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Removal of inaccurate information that is not properly sourced is not a violation of "3RR". The Cleanup Kid (talk) 05:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- The issue has been discussed time and time again at WP:PW. Per WP:V and WP:RS the note stands. Any more issues regarding the subject should be taken up with WP:PW. Also note that you are in violation of WP:3RR. Any additional reverts to Pontiac Silverdome will result in your account being blocked from editing further.--UnquestionableTruth-- 20:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- First sentence of WP:V: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth..." WP:V is a Wikipedia policy. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- "It doesn't really matter if the statement is true or not, it's just whether or not sources can back it up." is not Wikipedia policy. The Cleanup Kid (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please share what is incorrect. I'm only following Wikipedia guidelines. If the sources are not saying what the statement says, by all means change it, but removing it entirely isn't the proper thing to do. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
May 2011[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Silverdome. Your edits have been reverted or removed.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in you being blocked from editing. BilCat (talk) 21:46, 9 May 2011 (UTC)