User talk:Barwick

Welcome!

Hello Barwick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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! 

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 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.

Acroterion (talk) 02:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 shown interest in governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. 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.

Acroterion (talk) 02:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Oath Keepers for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:49, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not much inclined to talk to you on this topic to be honest. I've tried to discuss the facts here, and you've claimed I'm "treating this like a forum". No, I'm pointing out that the article is blatantly biased, and nobody seems to care because "reputable sources don't bother to address the claim that others have said about Oath Keepers". Imagine this... someone writes an article in a major news outlet saying "XYZ said that Oath Keepers is an anti-government, far-right organization. That is not true". Nobody does that. It's stupid. They just ignore the stupid that other organizations make. Barwick (talk) 05:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, those major news outlets simply just say as fact that "Oath Keepers is an anti-government, far-right organization." It's in the cited sources. That you disagree with those sources, or with the entire concept of judicial review for that matter, is irrelevant to Wikipedia. We present the world as mainstream reliable sources present it. Your apparent belief that those sources are all wrong about the Oath Keepers is of zero consequence to the encyclopedia. Your dispute is with the sources, and we can't help you "fix" them. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 06:10, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the discrtionary sanctions above apply to talk pages as well as articles. ¬¬¬¬ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 07:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Did you really just say that the SPLC is to blame for some idiot to get homicidal? (Does that mean, vice versa, that you'd blame Trump for the El Paso shooting?) You are skating on thin ice here--we are well into NOTFORUM territory. Please take the above warnings seriously. If you cannot play by the rules, and these rules include policies and guidelines on what are considered reliable sources, you may find yourself blocked or topic banned. Drmies (talk) 03:16, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not read the statements given by the shooter at the FRC? He explicitly stated that he searched for "anti gay groups", and saw SPLC's blatant lies claiming that FRC was a hate group. https://www.frc.org/newsroom/southern-poverty-law-center-linked-to-frc-shooting-in-chilling-new-interrogation-video

I suggest you stop threatening me with wikipedia warnings and all your wikipedia rules. I spend virtually zero of my life dealing with the sea of rules on this website. So people like you threatening me with random consequences for something I have no clue what in the world those "notices" even mean, really doesn't scare me. Barwick (talk) 04:32, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Acroterion (talk) 15:11, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic banned indefinitely from all pages and discussions related to post-1932 American politics. Please read WP:TBAN to see what "topic banned" means.

You have been sanctioned per the WP:ANI discussion here.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Bishonen | talk 20:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bishonen | talk 20:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Perhaps you really have quit the site and will never return, but if not, you are now blocked indefinitely. This block is not for your conservative viewpoints. Administrators do not police viewpoints - they police behavior. I don't care what your viewpoints are. I don't care if consensus was consistently in favor of liberal viewpoints. I care that you seem to be incapable of participating in a collegial fashion when consensus is against you, and simultaneously unwilling to restrict yourself to topic areas that do not cause you so much upset. Looking back through your contributions all the way to the beginning, sparse as they are, I see that this is not a new behavior. So no matter what your viewpoint is, your attitude is not welcome here. You may appeal this block by adding, {{Unblock|YOUR REASON HERE}} to this page. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:32, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]