Disciple4lif

Welcome!

Hello, Disciple4lif, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

January 2019

Hello, I'm Kiwi128. I noticed that you recently removed content from Fox News without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Kiwi128 (talk) 08:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry about replying on your archive. I’ve not figured out how to reply Disciple4lif (talk) 04:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Disciple4lif

January 2019

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. DanielRigal (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Please note that that warning is normally used for people who make defamatory articles. What you did at User talk:JDDJS/Archive 5 was slightly different but similarly unacceptable. You went into another user's talk page space and made a fake "archive" page in which you made silly accusations and ranted at them. They would have no way to know that the page was even there unless they stumbled over it or if it broke their archiving mechanism the next time they tried to archive. As such, that looks like a sneaky and deceptive way to attack somebody without them knowing and to face no reply. I'm not sure if that was motivated by cowardice or mere cluelessness but you must never do this again. Let me make this simple. Do not attack other editors. Do not fiddle with other people's archives, user pages or personal drafts unless they invite you to. --DanielRigal (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Note: You also posted pretty much the same rant on your own user page. As that does not include the part attacking another editor I'll leave that as it is. It probably falls foul of WP:NOTWEBHOST, so maybe somebody else will tag it for deletion, but I'm happy to let you reflect on whether it makes you look silly. (Hint: You can delete it at any time if you decide that it does.) --DanielRigal (talk) 11:40, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Response: The person said reply to her on her talk page. I saw no way to respond. So I responded in the archive. It's only considered attack by those who enforce their supremacy against free expression. Thankfully Liberal Fascism is primarily only an American occurrence. And thankfully no one takes Wikipedia seriously. Disciple4lif (talk) 14:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)Disciple4lif

You claim that you don't know how to reply on a Talk page (Hint: You just did exactly that so that is clearly nonsense) but you do know how to make a brand new fake archive page in another user's User Talk space? You also seem to claim not to know what "archive" means? Sorry mate. I don't buy it. The simultaneous combination of ability and ineptitude that you claim is implausible to me.

So, where does that leave you? Well, you do have an easy out. As you claim that Wikipedia is worthless then why not just go somewhere else? You clearly want to advance a political viewpoint. If you are not here to help us build an encyclopaedia then there are plenty of other places where you can go to have your say about politics. Your other option is to try editing articles that are not about political or controversial subjects and to save your politics for somewhere else. That might work out for you. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Response: Wikipedia is to be void of bias, but like a authoritarian you attack people for the very thing you are guilty of. You didn't correct me like stable minded wikipedians, you used malicious words to attack and if you continue I will report you for abuse. I will be on Wikipedia for the rest of my days fighting fascists who taint truth in favor of their supremacy ideals. My discussion is done with you, be gone. Disciple4lif (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2019 (UTC)Disciple4lif

Response: BTW yes, I figured out how to respond while talking to you. Thanks for your help. Disciple4lif (talk) 21:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)Disciple4lif

Discretionary Sanctions Notification - American Politics

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 recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. 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.

power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Who has rank over the administrators? There is a clear and obvious bias against Republicans and media associated with American Conservatism. When compared to their American political counterparts on the left, the bias, the defamation is absent. I have corrected these before just to be shot down by majority vote. As long as this exists people will continue to think of Wikipedia as a 3rd rate encyclopedia created by the whims, emotions, ignorance, and hatred of the American left. Wikipedia could be a great resource across the spectrum of political topics if one side of that spectrum ceased to have the power and desire to promote an environment of authoritarianism. Disciple4lif (talk) 22:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Disciple4lif

If this is a response to the alert you were given, it wasn't given to you by an Administrator. Doug Weller talk 16:35, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

What does that mean? And why won't you allow Government Crime Data, GAO.GOV, on illegal immigrant crime on the illegal immigrant page? User:Disciple4lif (talk)Disciple4lifUser:Disciple4lif (talk)

II meant that Power-enwiki isn't an administrator. As to your second question, in part because you are trying to spin statistics on crimes caused by non-citizens to suggest that they are all caused by undocumented immigrants, which simply isn't correct. See the bottom of the talk page. Doug Weller talk 12:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

We should have done a deep dive into the Congressional Budget Offices report on Criminal Alien Crime. It’s insane the US GOVERNMENT isn’t a valid source. Disciple4lif (talk) 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

You said, “you are trying to spin statistics on crimes caused by non-citizens to suggest that they are all caused by undocumented immigrants“. The definition of ‘criminal alien” in the Government’s report is, “ Noncitizens who are residing in the United States legally or illegally and are convicted of a crime.”

I’m not sure if you just don’t like the truth in the report, but it’s fact.  Disciple4lif (talk) 22:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Response

THAT REPORT IS 100% ABOUT ILLEGAL CRIMINAL ALIENS. You either know this and are acting oblivious or you choose to remain ignorant.

Try reading the first page Disciple4lif (talk) 10:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Casimir Pulaski

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions 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. Thank you. Seasider53 (talk) 11:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)