User talk:99Truthbetold

99Truthbetold, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi 99Truthbetold! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:08, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, 99Truthbetold. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. PlastikAutomatonProd (talk) 05:12, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. OrionTribute (talk) 23:50, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Jim Bates (politician)—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:32, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Jim Bates (politician). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:35, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content as have been doing continuously on Jim Bates (politician). ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Captain RaJu or whomever you may be. It appears to me that you or some other party are the ones who keep editing the Wikipedia page on Congressman Bates after appropriate changes are made. Now you accuse me of continuous edits. In reality, I am only removing the material which keeps coming back. I have seen attack dogs in similar circumstances, and it seems that some "attack dogs" have taken to Congressman Bates. I would suggest that if someone should be blocked, it is those who keep editing this page to revert to its derogatory presentation. Please stop it. This is not fair to the Congressman or any other victim of such activity.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99Truthbetold (talk • contribs)

@99Truthbetold:, we are objecting to the fact that you are removing independent reporting (e.g. the Washington Post) on things that are commonly known. Wikipedia compiles articles from freely available independent sources. the things you are removing have been reported on. As editors we do not push one view or another: we just compile the available sources. You may not like what they say, but you this is how we create articles.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:44, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Jim Bates (politician). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jim Bates (politician), you may be blocked from editing. Removing relevant and sourced content is vandalism. Just because it doesn't reflect well on the subject of the article doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the article. If you believe the content doesn't comply with Wikipedia policies, bring it to the article's talk page. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 18:35, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:47, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:19, 24 December 2019 (UTC)