Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:54, 13 November 2021

This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people abortion They should not be given alerts for those areas.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Archives

BobRoberts14 (old account, I haven't sockpuppeted since 2019)

Vandalism of Urnas Abiertas article

Hello, I'm Asaturn. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Urnas Abiertas have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Asaturn (talk) 09:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Stop reverting edits of mine that include sourced information. You are using undue, unsourced, original research claims that are extremely inaccurate and biased. Bill Williams 09:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Twitter, linkedin, and the about pages of two different websites do not back up your claims that they are a U.S. state department puppet meant to take down the Nicaraguan government. Bill Williams 09:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I never made any of these claims. The sources are from their own website. If you have an issue with their own website as a source, please send me an alternative. Also, I undid your last blanking because it is blatant vandalism and completely inappropriate considering our history and your continued harassment and abuse of this platform. Thanks. Asaturn (talk) 09:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

This is your edit and sources, which basically consist of social media and the about page of two different websites, none of which backs up your claims. Bill Williams 10:00, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

I think you may have a vision problem worse than me! The links you shared here clearly show more than just a website and a few social media links. I linked directly to two reports (the PDFs, #3 and #8) as well as a news article (#9). If you have something constructive to add then please do so, otherwise this discussion is over as it is going nowhere. Please stop vandalizing the article. I have given up on trying to correct the mess you've made of the 2021 Election article. Misplaced Pages is not your soapbox. https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion Asaturn (talk) 10:35, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Continued vandalism of Urnas Abiertas article

Hello, I'm Asaturn. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Urnas Abiertas have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. This is the 2nd time I've asked you to stop blanking the good faith content. If you have an issue with the content, let's talk it over on the talk page. Asaturn (talk) 09:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to repeat myself, you cannot use random social media and about pages as supposedly reliable sources to back up your biased claims that they are an anti-Nicaraguan group that supports terrorism. Bill Williams 09:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Per WP's own Reliable Sources policy on sources, you can use social media to refer to the subject itself when ther social media is self-descriptive and run by the subject. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources Please immediately stop vandalizing the article. Asaturn (talk) 09:59, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Also I never once said they were a group that supports terrorism. Everything I said is cited by good sources per WP policy. Please stop vandalizing the article and please stop lying. Asaturn (talk) 10:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

You didn't use their own description of themselves. You stated that they want to discredit the election as their goal, are composed of only two nicaraguans, support partisan right wingers, "claim to work for," and then mentioned random conspiracy theories about their connections to Europe and the U.S., all claims requiring reliable sources, of which you have 0.

"UCAB is directed by XXX, a conservative priest who openly supported the 2019 Venezuelan uprising attempt." you claimed they supported terrorists. You have repeatedly insulted me with no evidence while I have provided it repeatedly. Bill Williams 10:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Your disruptive editing (blanking half of the page without cause) prevented me from saving before I could paste the template into the placeholder. The article has been updated with the correct information. Everything in the article is cited with good sources per WP Reliable Sources / Perennial sources. Asaturn (talk) 10:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

They state in their presentation that their goal was to (direct quote) "discredit the country’s vote" and they called the vote (which had yet to even take place "an electoral farce." I would suggest you actually read the report, which comes directly from their own website. Asaturn (talk) 10:18, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

They only discredited the vote after it was released and clearly completely false, which I already cited a dozen reliable sources proving , and once again you have cited no reliable sources for your conspiracy theories. I removed unsourced original research with no factual backing and replaced it with reliably sourced information. Stop bothering me on my talk page with your nonsense, you provided zero reliable sources whatsoever besides social media and the about pages of two articles, while I provided five reliable news articles, and I did not misquote my articles while you produced conspiracy theories nowhere mentioned on your supposed sources.

Your sources shown below are Twitter and LinkedIn and a complete rewrite, misquote, and alteration of two website about pages Bill Williams 10:21, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Their reports both came out weeks before the election. You are lying or totally misinformed. Please read the reports yourself. I cited the organization itself! I am not citing any "conspiracy theories!" I am not "bothering you" I am following Misplaced Pages policy and providing you with friendly warnings to stop vandalizing the page.

Every single one of my sources is either Urnas Abiertas itself or sources that meet Misplaced Pages's standards.

I directly quoted the sources. If you have better information then please improve the article. Erasing half the article because you don't like it is not an improvement and meets the criteria for vandalism and is absolutely inappropriate and unconstructive. Asaturn (talk) 10:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

"This talk was organized by two individuals who claim to work for Urnas Abiertas" claim to work? That implies they are lying, and is clearly not a direct quote. "... both partisan right-wing activists" they called themselves that? Somehow I doubt anyone would refer to themselves that way. "...anti-Sandinista National Liberation Front activist" did he refer to himself that way? Somehow I doubt that was well. "their goal was to discredit the results in a presentation done in partnership with International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance and Venezuelan right-wing activists" I also doubt they refer to their partners as "Venezuelan right-wing activists." You have no sources for your claims, only random links. Bill Williams 10:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Would you prefer "allegedly work for?" I can change it to "work for" but people seemed to not like that before! They are cited on Wilson Center's website, LinkedIn, and in their own reports as working for Urnas Abiertas. The official website does not list them but the talk does. What do you want? You seem to be arguing to discredit the organization itself in an attempt to keep it anonymous. It seems like you know that the more legitimacy and information that is added, the less credible and more dubious their 18.5% claim sounds. The quote is taken from their report. The "right wing activists" is taken from articles on Misplaced Pages and quotes from their talk and their report. Everything is cited. This is your own POV not liking the facts, not an issue with anything I cited. Please add good constructive information (don't blank the article) — or move on. Asaturn (talk) 10:46, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Move on from my talk page. I have repeatedly disproven your nonsensical conspiracy theories with my own reliable sources, to which you respond with random links that do not relate at all to whta you are saying. Everything you just said is original research that you compiled from across the internet and is disputed by reliable sources. Bill Williams 10:48, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

You are unhinged and need to be banned from all of Misplaced Pages. Asaturn (talk) 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

DO NOT quote me as "per Bill Williams" as if I agreed to some change in the article. Every single fabric of your text is riddled with nonsense not backed by reliable sources, purely peddling conspiracy theories. Two random individuals from the organization giving a talk to a random think tank has absolutely no relevance to the 2021 Nicaraguan geneneral election being completely fabricated as shown by every reliable source. Bill Williams 10:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Unhinged article vandalizer and formerly banned user who used to go by the name Bill Williams and has some beef with Nicaragua, as I have said numerous times, the sources are from Urnas Abiertas' own website. Are you claiming that isn't their website and that the CNN links etc are all false? If that's the case, it sounds like they are a dubious source and should be removed from 2021 Nicaraguan general election. Asaturn (talk) 10:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

1. "Urnas Abiertas". Urnas Abiertas. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
2. "Twitter.com: Urnas Abiertas". Twitter.com. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
3. "Nicaragua 2021: Abstention, Paramilitary Control and Harassment of State Workers on November 7, Election Day" (PDF). Urnas Abiertas. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
4. "Urnas Abiertas Blog". Urnas Abiertas. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
5. "Pedro Salvador Fonseca Herrera". Wilson Center. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
6. "Olga Valle". Wilson Center. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
7. "Pedro Salvador Fonseca (He/Him)". LinkedIn. Retrieved 13 November 2021.
8. "Nicaragua Elecciones 2021: Un Plan doloso Para Acabar con La Democracia" (PDF).{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
9. ""There will be no dialogue or transition with Maduro in power"".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
10. Multiple sources:
    • "Nicaragua's Ortega wins fourth term in election slammed as 'pantomime'". France24. 2021-11-08. Retrieved 2021-11-08.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
    • Hu, Caitlin; Gallón, Natalie; Alberti, Mia. "Ortega wins again in Nicaraguan elections panned as 'parody' by international observers". CNN. Retrieved 2021-11-08.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
    • "Nicaragua votes, with a jailed opposition and Ortega's re-election all but certain". France 24. 2021-11-07. Retrieved 2021-11-13.
    • Phillips, Tom (5 November 2021). "Nicaraguan exiles see vote as step on Ortega's road to dictatorship". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 November 2021.
    • "Nicaragua's Ortega decries foes who question his re-election". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2021-11-10.
    • "'Rigged': Criticism mounts of Nicaragua's 'sham' elections under Ortega". news.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2021-11-10.
    • Solomon, Daina Beth (2021-11-08). "Nicaragua's Ortega set to win election that U.S. blasts as 'pantomime'". Reuters. Retrieved 2021-11-11.
11. "OAS assembly condemns Nicaragua's election as 'not free'". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2021-11-13.
12. Reuters (2021-11-13). "OAS members condemn Nicaragua elections, urge action". Reuters. Retrieved 2021-11-13. {{cite news}}: |last= has generic name (help)