PatrickLittleVolunteer

Welcome!

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

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Patrick Little (engineer), which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 19:14, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

note- user has renamed from User talk:PatrickLittleCampaign-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:52, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I have answered this multiple times to multiple people. Go ahead an ban me while you allow professional biased editors to slander Patrick. I am archiving everything as evidence. PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 19:16, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

"Evidence" for what, dare I ask? —C.Fred (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Dare I ask if you are aware of the previous interactions, the situation, and what else has been said? PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 20:46, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

My question is, if you're so concerned, why wait to gather more evidence? Why not just open a case at WP:BLPN now? —C.Fred (talk) 21:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

You know I am right. Why not just edit his page to be unbiased and there wouldn't be an issue. Clearly a senior editor who is unbiased when it comes to Jewish/Gentile relations needs to take ownership of this a do what is right for Patrick and Wikipedia. PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 21:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

There is no "tak[ing] ownership" of articles; articles are not owned or controlled by a single editor. They operate on the basis of consensus, which is a community effort among editors. (To be clear, it's not majority rule, and it's not unanimous assent.) We prefer editors to be neutral and unbiased when it comes to articles; that why we encourage editors (like yourself) to not directly edit any article where they have a conflict of interest, but instead to request edits on the talk page.

It is also important to note the policies of WP:Verifiability and WP:Reliable sources. Both of those are cornerstones of articles, especially related to a living person. I've seen some of the edits you've requested about counter-Semitism, but I haven't seen any sources cited in your requests. On the other hand, I've seen other editors adding material that is backed up by sources.

You know, if rather than focusing on the editors and their possible motives, you instead looked at the sources, you could probably make a good challenge to at least one recent edit. That's really the way to edit articles: focus on the content, not the other editors. (Yes, I know, you've gotten the raw end of that because of the exception to that rule, with COI editors and the restrictions placed on them. However, alleging that every other editor is paid off by the other side in this election is not the way to proceed.) —C.Fred (talk) 21:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Three raw unedited interviews Please do what is right Pastebin W7pFjqFG PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 21:28, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

An interview uploaded to pastebin is not a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 21:33, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Those were all national outlets, one of which is being used in the citations here. You are literally proving Pat right, so at this point I hope you continue. I think we just stumbled into the next viral topic. PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 22:03, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to delete the pastebin and this message to keep this page clear, or don't. My intent is not to astroturf (which will happen if you leave it there), it was to deliver raw unedited information to the senior editors of Wikipedia in hopes this would be easier to resolve with common sense. That has been accomplished. I wish I understood the formal processes and was more Wiki savvy, unfortunately I am not. If you are sincere in your wish to help, which is probably the case since you took to time to actually write instead of ignoring, Thank-you. PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 22:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

If they were national outlets, you wouldn't need to go the pastebin route. You could've just given the link to the article (or the publication date and page for an offline copy); then we could have verified against a reliable, published source. The issue with pastebin is there's no way to authenticate the content against what was published. Conversely, if I go to the web page of a newspaper, I feel comfortable that what's written there is what was reviewed and approved by their editorial staff. —C.Fred (talk) 23:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

PatrickLittleCampaign

That's better, I Guess.If this was you, let me know and I'll redirect that page here. You should mention somewhere here if it is you so no one thninks you are block evading or socking. Don't know if can merge the two. I can try.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Do take care regarding the WP:COI and WP:PAID issues.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes it the same person as before. I am an unpaid volunteer, basically a glorified fan who is trying to keep Patrick's wiki free of bias. There is a large and well funded effort to label him with every derogatory term imaginable. Patrick does not hate any race. He loves all God's creatures big and small. He served his country with honor and he deserves a fair shake. Semper Fi.PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk) 21:05, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I wish to add a description of Counter-Semitism and include it in Patrick's views. I had previously promised another moderator to submit major revisions for approval and, respectfully, I still feel bound by that promise and hope that this medium can serve this process. Thank-you for your time and assistance in this sensitive matter.

Counter-Semitism (also referred to as Judeo-criticism and Judeo-skepticism) is a neutral term used to describe the position of opponents of Jewish supremacism and chauvinism in the dialectic of Jew-Gentile relations. The term emerged during the latter 20th century, as "antisemitism"—itself of contentious origins—had been purposefully distorted into a pure epithet by controlled medias, in a critical theory process of ritual defamation. Counter-Semitism returns the chronology of the discourse to the objective order, emphasizing the initiation of conflict as arising from actions of the Jewish, rather than Gentile party. That is to say a self-defensive opposition and criticism of Jewish supremacism.

Another hack job on Pat's page just occurred. I request that user be blocked from editing this wiki.

May 2018

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 ~~~~}}.  ... discospinster _talk 00:01, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

"The post office is nationalized. If it were privately owned, then the jews could make it so I could not receive or send any mail. Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc are the new public telephone system, the new phone book, the new postal service, and the new public square. Not nationalizing these companies would like allowing the jews, with their infinite, printable capital, to buy up and control all means of communication except for couriers 200 years ago.

There is no free speech without first nationalizing these companies, as the ADL now decides who gets to use the modern equivalents of phones, phone books, the postal system, and the public square." - Patrick Little — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrickLittleVolunteer (talk • contribs)

Please remember that free speech refers to the fact that Congress shall make no laws restricting the freedom of speech. (I.e., free speech means this private website is free to create and enforce behavioral requirements.) If your quote from Little is correct, then there is an inherent contradiction in his statement.

However, that is not the issue here. The issue is your conduct. Not only should you read up on our policies—which you must follow to edit here—but please also read the article about the Streisand effect. Some of the behaviour that you briefly suggested (but removed from your comment above) could backfire rather badly.

I think that is the ultimate reason why I find myself agreeing with Discospinster's block. Your conduct does not demonstrate that you are here to truly build a neutral encyclopedia. Your conduct suggests some motive regarding an election, whether it be as an innocent supporter of a candidate, a supporter willing to use devious means to support a candidate, or a supporter of an opposing candidate sent to malign the opponent. Frankly, it doesn't matter, because it has tainted your actions. I would only support an unblock of your account if it included a topic ban for the remainder of the calendar year on articles related to the 2018 US and California elections, broadly construed. —C.Fred (talk) 12:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

As to your previous threat that you (PatrickLittleVolunteer) removed: Wikipedia have dealt with the likes of you before, and will do so again in the future. We always welcome more attention. ... discospinster _talk 18:45, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

This edit proves I've been a fool to trust you. You are, as has been said, on some sort of crusade and you've chosen Wikipedia as your battle field. Clearly, you are not here to build the encyclopedia. Clearly, I would oppose any unblock regardless of what conditions you would agree to.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

The "the ADL now decides" quote is sufficient to recognize this user has an insurmountable COI.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:11, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

ITT Autistic screeching from pe*ple who relish controlling the information flow poking a baker with a stick. I was respectful. I attempted to solve this via compromise imploring fairness but fair wasn't good enough. You want to control more and play politics. You want to name call like children with low IQ. Well, the Little revolution has no breaks, ergo your're about to be his constituents. Pray tell how you plan on controlling that? ~/pol/

A notice to all editors, don't feed the trolls. This user has self-declared to be a "representative of the Patrick Little for Senate Campaign". Little's own website states his campaign staff is composed anonymous 4chan posters from /pol/. This user is seeking attention and provocation. Do not indulge. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

A notice to all editors: One look at animalparty's editing history will show we are both biased, yet only one is allowed a voice. Honesty vs. Dishonesty. Good vs. Evil. It's time to choose. ~memeWarfareVeteran #Nationalize #Wikipedia