User talk:RogerO SD

March 2011

This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. What you put in to that article was racist. Realize that that is not allowed. Furthermore, you need sources for all of what you put into articles like that. Jasper Deng (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four halfwidth tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:03, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Correct template Dave Dial (talk) 04:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can [profanity redacted], Dave. [personal attack deleted](RogerO SD (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you make personal attacks on other people, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Kansan (talk) 16:35, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My last comment was exactly that and it was immediately deleted (within minutes). My first comment was like that also and I was unfairly branded me a "racist." I have sources for what I wrote. He is not interested in the sources and will not let others review what I wrote. You need to look at what your editor is doing, not just me. He started the name calling. I hope you have a log. Is it Wikipedia policy that the editors can suppress information, abuse and attack the contributors, but not the reverse? I have no confidence that you all want to be fair and look at things objectively. That is the problem. There seems to be a huge bias here. (RogerO SD (talk) 16:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I'll take a look at the logs. If somebody did accuse you of racism without proof (which I am not sure what happened as I have not reviewed those logs), it would be a violation of Wikipedia policy. Even so, it doesn't give you license to make comments like [profanity deleted - feel free to readd (@Kansan)]. Kansan (talk) 16:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked and did not find any evidence of anybody accusing you of racism - if somebody did, can you show me where to look? Your edits were undone because they introduced a bias and did not have any sources. Your talk page edit was undone because talk pages are for talking about how to make the article better, not for posting rants about the subject. Kansan (talk) 16:49, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's a warning from Jasper Deng on my talk page about me posting "racist" material. What I posted is based on facts. (RogerO SD (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I believe he was wrong to make comments about racism and I left a comment on your talk page. He was correct to say that you can't add controversial material to articles without a citation, though. Kansan (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I added a couple of paragraphs in the discussion with sources, he deleted it within a few minutes. Even discussion of it -- with or without sources -- is not desired. My opinion is that the purpose of the editor of this article is just to bash and smear Obama's political opponents and not to inform. He never said show me your sources, he just said my account would be deleted if I posted the material again. Not much concern for the facts here. The editor can condemn my motivations without any discussion and not allow any group discussion at all, but I am not allowed to question his motivations. This is how Wikipedia works, I guess. A political clique takes charge of articles with no regard for the facts or for fairness. (RogerO SD (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Please read WP:Verifiability. This explains what it takes to get material included into the articles (reliable sources). As the article has many reliable sources stating the Christianity of Obama, we can't just put in uncited information claiming otherwise. Kansan (talk) 18:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly, you need to write from a neutral point of view, follow our policy on living persons' articles, and not attack other editors. Your edit constituted a serious violation of WP:BLP that we cannot tolerate.Jasper Deng (talk) 18:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The racism accusation occured because of the following text you inserted into the article:"but a kind of black identity religion, based on the collective guilt of the white race and the destruction of America as the tool of the white oppressor, which according to the doctrine will bring on the millennial Utopia.".Jasper Deng (talk) 19:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from attacking other editors on article-talkpages. Talk pages are meant to be used as a place to discuss ways of improving the associated article, they are not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 03:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guidelines

Guidelines apply to everyone on Wikipedia, not just you, as you said. Unfortunately, you have been the one being constantly told of our guidelines because you are not following them. Please please read, and get familiar with:

Jasper Deng (talk) 01:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RogerO SD for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. SummerPhD (talk) 02:44, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]