User talk:Tingtone
February 2014[edit]
This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at Leland Yee, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. If you continue to add POV material to an article of a living person, while abusing multiple accounts, your account may be blocked. Dave Dial (talk) 03:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Tingtone, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who use multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. Using multiple accounts includes User:Hugolee1 - and ips User:209.237.51.147, User:50.242.85.233 & User:50.150.119.31. Enough. Dave Dial (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Leland Yee - BLP and reliable sourcing[edit]
Hello, I'm afraid your attempt at including a source is still unacceptable. You should really read up on Wikipedia's living person's policy, as well as our reliable sources and neutral point of view policies. You cannot use primary sources to indicate something is important enough to include into an article. Much less use your own biased wording as you have done repeatedly on the Leland Yee article. Insinuations or claims of a living persons being racist are not acceptable. Please stop inserting this into the article, and do not use various IP addresses and other accounts to get around 3RR to include this. That is considered sockpuppeting, and our BLP policy allows you to be reverted each time in any case. Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 17:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
- That's not my account. I did not put anything related to racist words, all I put is just content form SCA-5 government document and link to CA government site. If you saw racist words, that's not me, someone else account try to add it, please don't put others mistakes on me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tingtone (talk • contribs)
- I'm not convinced that those accounts are not yours. In fact, I am totally convinced you are all the same. Since you've used the exact same language in your edits and have made the same mistakes. If you continue, I will be forced to take this to SPI and/or other admin venues. Insinuating that someone wants to exclude people based on their race or ethnic background is the same as calling them racist. I am probably on the fence on this issue, but it is not appropriate to call either side racist. Especially without reliable sourcing. That is a blockable offense. Period. Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 17:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
- would you mind take some time to look at CA government document and voting records? http://legiscan.com/CA/rollcall/SCA5/id/313934 all my words are site from the official government document in http://legiscan.com/CA/rollcall/SCA5/id/313934 If you still think differently, would you mind take this to other admin, I am pretty sure I did not a word into the government document also checkout SCA5 on wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Constitutional_Amendment_No.5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tingtone (talk • contribs)
- You are pointing me to look at voting records. That is a primary source. You need to read these links I have directed you to read. Specifically the BLP, reliable sources, neutral point of view and primary source policies. Also, pointing me to an article you yourself just created using a sock puppet is not very favorable to your cause. Take some time and read the policies I have given you links to. I have no desire to fix the information you are trying to add, and I don't have time to have the article you created go through the PROD process. Also, please sign your posts using the four tildes ~ ~ ~ ~(together) Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
- This link is not just voting record, http://legiscan.com/CA/drafts/SCA5/2013 is the text of senate bill, simply click text, you will see, This is CA senate bill, it is official bill pass senate and now at CA assembly, tell me why it is not a reliable source, also, I did not create https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Constitutional_Amendment_No.5, someone else did, This is a ongoing event, close to 100000 people signed petition event in http://www.change.org/petitions/california-state-assembly-vote-no-to-sca-5-3 so maybe there are other wiki editor did. (64.125.189.90 (talk) 23:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC))
- You are pointing me to look at voting records. That is a primary source. You need to read these links I have directed you to read. Specifically the BLP, reliable sources, neutral point of view and primary source policies. Also, pointing me to an article you yourself just created using a sock puppet is not very favorable to your cause. Take some time and read the policies I have given you links to. I have no desire to fix the information you are trying to add, and I don't have time to have the article you created go through the PROD process. Also, please sign your posts using the four tildes ~ ~ ~ ~(together) Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
- would you mind take some time to look at CA government document and voting records? http://legiscan.com/CA/rollcall/SCA5/id/313934 all my words are site from the official government document in http://legiscan.com/CA/rollcall/SCA5/id/313934 If you still think differently, would you mind take this to other admin, I am pretty sure I did not a word into the government document also checkout SCA5 on wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Constitutional_Amendment_No.5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tingtone (talk • contribs)
- I'm not convinced that those accounts are not yours. In fact, I am totally convinced you are all the same. Since you've used the exact same language in your edits and have made the same mistakes. If you continue, I will be forced to take this to SPI and/or other admin venues. Insinuating that someone wants to exclude people based on their race or ethnic background is the same as calling them racist. I am probably on the fence on this issue, but it is not appropriate to call either side racist. Especially without reliable sourcing. That is a blockable offense. Period. Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 17:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Tingtone, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]
|
Hi Tingtone! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |