User talk:Diegosames1789
Welcome
[edit]Hello Diegosames1789 and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to Heteronormativity, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.
If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.
I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Mathglot (talk) 02:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC) Mathglot (talk) 02:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Standard notice about editing in gender-related topics
[edit]Hi, Diegosames1789. I hope you enjoy your editing experience at Wikipedia, and decide to stay. You've had a bit of a rocky start, which is not really your fault; it's hard enough to learn to be an editor at Wikipedia, without compounding the difficulty by starting out in a controversial area, like articles on gender-related topics. You might find it easier to get on board here, if you picked an interest area of yours that isn't a hot button issue, like trans* and gender-related topics; these topic areas undergo even stricter scrutiny by the community, than other articles. I advise trying a non-controversial topic area for your first edits as a new user, but if you are going to continue to try to edit articles related to gender, then you should at least know about the stricter rules in effect, so you don't inadvertently run afoul of them. These have been codified by Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, below. Please read and understand this notice written by ArbCom, and follow the links.
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 (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. 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.
Please feel free to ask if you have any questions. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 08:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
April 2020
[edit]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Tara Reade.[1] Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted.[2] Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:24, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, per wikipedia's vandalism policy vandalism is defined as "[t]he malicious removal of encyclopedic content, or the changing of such content beyond all recognition, without any regard to our core content policies of neutral point of view (which does not mean no point of view), verifiability and no original research . . ." Linking the Tara Reads article to the article for media blackout was biased and failed to comport with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Additionally, the link seemed to constitute original research, thus likely violating at least two of wikipedia's three core principles. The current link of Tara Reade to the Joe Biden sexual assault allegation is, in my view much more appropriate than linking it to media blackout. I believe my edits were in good faith and I will refer you to wikipedia's policy to assume good faith and although I do not construe your allegations of me having a bad faith motive to be a personal attack, future users may. Thank you Diegosames1789 5:35 17, April 2020 (UTC)
Important Notice
[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 abortion. 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.