YT DomDaBomb20

August 2021

Please refrain from making edits on Wikipedia pages such as those you made to Forward-center, without first discussing your changes on the article's talk page, Your edit(s) require discussion to establish consensus as this is considered a type of change that other editors should be allowed to comment on. Your edits do not appear to have been discussed and have been reverted. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:31, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Russian interference

Regarding your confusion, there is no "the author" here. There are myriad editors who document what RS say. Read and understand Mueller special counsel investigation. It would be wise to just agree with it, because we follow the best evidence and sources here. Any source that disagrees with it is an unreliable source. Don't read such sources.

The link provided to you of expert analysis is really good. Read it and learn. It confirms there was lots of Russian interference, plus cooperation and collusion with Russian intelligence by Trump and his campaign. In fact, Trump frequently obstructed all investigations, hid and destroyed evidence, and he lied about, protected, and aided the Russian efforts to undermine American democracy, sow discord, and spread distrust in the integrity of our elections. He continues aiding them by pushing his Big Lie about non-existent election fraud. He is not a patriot, but acts like a Russian "asset" (not an "agent") and a man being blackmailed by Putin.

You should read our articles that document all this stuff. We document all of what RS say, and your comment reveals ignorance of important facts. You don't want to be seen as a fringe editor here. I'll post a contentious topics alert for you so you are aware that any similar future comments and editing that leans that way can bring down sanctions on you. Because you have been made aware, it can happen from any administrator, without warning. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:13, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

-- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)