User talk:VMDeMolay

September 2022

Hello, I'm Hey man im josh. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Kristin Eklund seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Josh, I replied twice on your page. I'm trying to help two people who been threatened by Kristin, the emails were traced back to her.

The threats are terrifying and one of them has suffered already years of defamation from Kristin. All of it is a lie.

Kristin should have to provide years of solid evidence of her false accusations and allegations, she is a sordid person trying to ruin good, old standing, bona fide, decent sound artists lives.

Please, don't defend this person. Her emails are with the law and there is nothing legal about them.

Thank you, and God bless. VMDeMolay (talk) 12:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Kristin Eklund. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on VMDeMolay. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I was the first being attacked on 'you should be ashamed'. No one should be ashamed, of defending innocent civilians, against criminals who prey on children, vulnerable people and the elderly. Can you please redirect this to the other editor. thanks. VMDeMolay (talk) 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: No one should be ashamed, rather, they should be highly regarded,for defending innocent civilians, against criminals who prey on children, vulnerable people and the elderly. VMDeMolay (talk) 18:07, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VMDeMolay, you appear to have come to edit Wikipedia in good faith, in order to contribute to righting what you believe is a great wrong. However, you, I, and almost all other people who edit Wikipedia start doing so without knowing about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, so that many of us start out doing things which are not allowed by those policies and guidelines. I did so when I started editing, and I'm afraid so have you. Both in an article and on talk pages you have made very serious accusations against someone, without providing any substantiation apart from your own say-so. We don't and can't accept serious allegations against people on the basis of no more evidence than the fact that someone who has decided to create a Wikipedia account says so, for the simple reason that anyone can create a Wikipedia account and say anything at all with it, true or false. That is a solid Wikipedia policy, and is not negotiable. In addition, when you have found other editors disagreeing with you, instead of politely and constructively discussing the reasons for the disagreement, you have made unsubstantiated accusations, and flung out expressions such as "criminally insane". That is not how Wikipedia works, and if you continue in that way sooner or later some administrator will block you from editing .No matter how strongly you disagree with other editors, express your disagreement in a civil manner. JBW (talk) 14:20, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being a decent human nevertheless. Justice for the assailed. May neither God or anyone have mercy on K.E. VMDeMolay (talk) 14:24, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}. — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 18:35, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

VMDeMolay (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Safeguarding of Fundamental Universal Human Rights, and Freedom of Speech, against censorship driven by proven criminals

Decline reason:

Unfortunately your unblock request shows no understanding at all of the issues which led to the block, despite the time and effort I put into explaining them to you (which I did in the hope of helping you to avoid being blocked). JBW (talk) 09:46, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This is actually very simple. If you know of a reliable source which states that a particular person has been proved to have committed particular criminal offences, then you can easily provide that source as a reference for that fact. If you don't know of such a source, then we have no evidence that it is true, so it would be wrong to state it as a fact. It really is as simple as that.JBW (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]