User talk:24.116.97.236

December 2023

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Scott O'Grady, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. As already mentioned in the talk discussion, there is consensus that the citation sources are reliable. Jamedeus (talk) 06:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

The source doesn't claim what the content of the article claims. The 3 sources referencing the tweets are all based on one report that never claims the tweets were a "promotion" or "endorsement" of the topic and they were retweets of other people's posts. The paragraph portrays the content of the tweets that were reported to have existed as if there were a reason to assume Scott O'Grady were endorsing the ideas. Only one article claims he did and it like the 2nd source are based off the first. Can't you see the game of telephone used to construct a narrative when 2 of three sources are stories about the first source? It's a violation of policy and completely unacceptable according to policy. 24.116.97.236 (talk) 04:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

---