User talk:Thenightaway

Repeated vandalism

Hello, you should not really abuse your editorial credentials and trim accurate and referenced contributions by other editors made in line with Wikipedia standards from the pages of the individuals you have racial personal prejudices or dislikes for. There is no place for bullying and abuse on Wikipedia - it is unacceptable. Contrubute, do not vandalise. --83.167.213.21 (talk) 13:50, 12 March 2022 (CET)

Wikipedia:Go ahead, vandalize

You are removing and retracting sourced content unreasonably from multiple pages to support your political motives. Please abide by Wikipedia policies and refrain from editing them without a valid reason and abide by WP:POINT and WP:NPOV.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. JohnnyPedro1998 (talk) 03:00, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia unfavorable to the truth on Joseph Ladapo

It would seem the fake news editors here are busy trying to spin the truth and the cited article itself by misrepresenting it in this BLP. I have tried a few times to correct this article from the fake news editors with this edit in () (In March 2022, Ladapo issued a recommendation "healthy kids not get COVID-19 vaccine, contradicting CDC" in Florida.) It just doesn't say what the pro vaccine editors want it to say... Hmm that would seem to be a violation of Wikipedia's rules and quite frankly intellectual dishonesty. Wiki is supposed to rely on creditable sources and taking and quoting the headline of the cited sources obviously cannot be allowed by the pro vaccine folks who wish to perpetrate fake news. And to that, I must ask why?

Editors here refuse to allow the word "healthy" to be included here and I must ask why? The cited source says "healthy children" and whenever those two words appear, it is immediately edited to delete the word "healthy" and carry water for the fake news editors.

Any one want to chime in and answer the question?: 2600:1700:7610:41E0:D54A:165:F3E5:33C2 (talk) 02:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

March 2022

Hello, I'm Volten001. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Ruben Vardanyan (businessman) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Volten001 ^talk 13:40, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Scott Jensen (Minnesota politician), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please do not revert another editor, and leave no edit summary to explain your edits. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Passive-aggressive edit summary

I have my own fair share of passive-aggressive edit summaries on pages that I feel are dominated by public relations interests of one form or another, but it is still important to ultimately assume good faith. What is this edit summary, after all, other than a bad-faith assumption that I had the desire to make a "brazen misrepresentation"? I was shortening it for a more due mention tacked to the end of the On Contact/RT section for Chris Hedges, as having these blurbs for every recent event can really pile up with a writer as prolific as Hedges. In the same edit where I did that-thing-you-have-issue-with, you can see I cut out (what I view as) undue descriptions of Hedges' environmental views/activism for reasons I elaborated in the talk page (though they were restored). What is your issue? Do you think I veer into promotional territory with my edits? Can you just come out and say what you mean without directing more passive-aggressive statements my way? Mewnst (talk) 07:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Ladapo article

Please refrain from removing sourced information that threatens the integrity of Joseph Lapado as your recent edit shows. The source states "healthy" children and you are vandalizing the article . Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:7610:41E0:7CB0:D9D1:83BE:D383 (talk) 15:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.2600:1700:7610:41E0:7CB0:D9D1:83BE:D383 (talk) 15:50, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@2600:1700:7610:41E0:7CB0:D9D1:83BE:D383: That was Not Vandalism Your Edit [1] Was unsourced (tags: possible unreferenced addition to BLP) that what the tags said on the edit Summary. And it falls on you to provide an reliable source or it will be challenged and removed. Chip3004 (talk) 15:54, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Keep repeating untruths and you will begin to believe the baloney friend. 2600:1700:7610:41E0:10E0:895E:7FA7:7405 (talk) 23:54, 23 March 2022 (UTC)