63.155.99.218

Warning

Crack on reporting me. Your comments were not only off topic, but also clearly a pov push, and vile in suggesting a broad daylight shooting of someone is justified because they have a prior criminal record. Koncorde (talk) 21:40, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

The POV push was repeating the bullshit line (Redacted) 63.155.99.218 (talk) 21:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

"I don't know why every crook who gets shot on camera needs to have a wikipedia article." Do not lie about the intent behind your screed. I also question your IP status, I am assuming you are either a previously banned editor or an editor who doesn't have the actual balls to hold such an opinion with a username that can be tracked. Koncorde (talk) 22:07, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I love editing with an IP. It makes the nutcases who run this propaganda outfit go berserk with paranoia. And my intent was obvious - I don't think wikipedia should bother making articles (Redacted) Let's make a big deal about it. Who cares? 63.155.99.218 (talk) 22:11, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Blocked

As far as I can see, you're just here to argue with people. Blocked for 31 hours. Acroterion (talk) 22:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, that would describe about 30% of the population on wikipedia. Another 30% could be described as power hungry sociopaths (like some people who change their usernames after abusing their sysop powers - and then troll the admin boards all day long - that's their life). And 40% are trying to build a nice encyclopedia, but have no interest or knowledge of the politics behind the scenes. As for this incident, I can see how you'd think that, but I was arguing against the propaganda going on the talk page of (Redacted). 63.155.99.218 (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Talk page access revoked due to continued BLP violations.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

It's interesting to find that you're blocked with talk page access lost. As I remarked on the talk page, our article says, with a source, that the distance between where Arbery lived is about 2 miles. I gather it did not when you made your claim but whatever, you came up with the 10 miles claim somehow. As I also said, if you have (non OR) sources to support such a wildly different distance, this is something we should discuss. Potentially it would make a difference to our article, and it is an important detail albeit also one I'm sure which will be cleared up over time either way. So if you had not made outrageous and trolly comments but instead engaged productively and discussed in good faith and provided such sources you could have potentially improved the article. Instead here is where we are. I did actually check for sources myself at the time I first read your comment. I'm guessing given your behaviour it was a waste of time and the truth is you have no such sources, you made up the distance, now discredited as is your comment. And so too it makes sense to ignore any comment you've made. Either way as I said I'm sure time will clear it up. If it turns out you were right, and further you did have sources, well again remember you could have been part of the solution instead of part of the problem. Nil Einne (talk) 05:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

---