CorCorCor
Unreliable sources edit
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Trump wall. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Jayjg (talk) 16:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- Could you explain how you mean this? CorCorCor (talk) 10:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- The sources you use must explicitly say what you're saying, and must explicitly tie what you are adding to the Trump wall. Otherwise it's original reasearch. Please click on the links in my comments, and carefully read the policies. Jayjg (talk) 13:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- Two points in reaction: 1) If you click on the textlinks to the border border barriers, their effectiveness is discussed there. 2) I incuded a source.
- Regarding your first point, you need explicit citations in the article you are adding material to, and they have to specifically discuss this in relation to the Trump wall: see WP:CITE and WP:NOR. Regarding your second point, the source does explicitly address the issue, but it's not clear to me that The Tennessee Star is a reliable source; we certainly don't have an article about it, and Wikipedia has articles on almost every reliable newspaper. Also please sign your posts with four tildes like this: ~~~~ Jayjg (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- Two points in reaction: 1) If you click on the textlinks to the border border barriers, their effectiveness is discussed there. 2) I incuded a source.
- The sources you use must explicitly say what you're saying, and must explicitly tie what you are adding to the Trump wall. Otherwise it's original reasearch. Please click on the links in my comments, and carefully read the policies. Jayjg (talk) 13:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Trump wall, you may be blocked from editing. As you have repeatedly been informed, the Tennessee Star is not a WP:RS (see here and here) and neither is your Hungarian government source (see WP:PARTISAN). Zazpot (talk) 16:37, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion edit
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Zazpot (talk) 20:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Trump wall is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBAP2 edit
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
A complaint about your editing was received at the edit warring noticeboard. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:09, 16 January 2021 (UTC)