User talk:UnaMacchia

Hello, UnaMacchia! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Discord server • IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper) Things to do Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 20:20, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Talia Lavin. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I did not add any information. I restored information that has been repeatedly deleted by someone trying to manicure this entry to erase negative information that was and is newsworthy. All of the two sentences that were restored are cited in the footnote. 2001:818:DFE1:EA00:30F8:2498:A037:BBFB (talk) 13:09, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

The WP:NYPOST is not an acceptable source for biographies of living people, because consensus has designated it generally unreliable. Please make sure to cite a reliable source for content you at to BLPs; you are equally responsible for providing acceptable sources whether you are the first person to add information, or adding it back.

Please also note that the WP:ONUS policy means you should seek a consensus on the talk page before adding back contested material. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:32, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2018-06-20/ty-article/new-yorker-apologizes-for-worker-claiming-ice-worker-had-nazi-tattoo/0000017f-e3b7-df7c-a5ff-e3ffd8c70000

https://www.thewrap.com/nyu-journalism-talia-lavin-new-yorker-fact-checker-false-ice-agent-nazi-tattoo/

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/new-yorker-fact-checker-resigns-after-slandering-ice-agent-and-marine-veteran-as-nazi

https://www.tampabay.com/news/military/veterans/Writer-resigns-from-New-Yorker-after-twitter-flap-over-Pasco-Marine-s-tattoo_169384738/ UnaMacchia (talk) 13:37, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/fact-checker-resigns-after-mistakenly-claiming-ice-employee-had-nazi-tattoo/

https://www.wral.com/story/writer-resigns-from-new-yorker-after-twitter-flap-over-pasco-marine-s-tattoo/17651821/

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/434975-nyu-hires-controversial-former-fact-checker-to-teach-journalism-course-on-far/ UnaMacchia (talk) 13:40, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

No one is disputing that it happened, so posting these links is kinda pointless. Polygnotus (talk) 13:45, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

All of these discussions are pointless. Because some right-wing CHUDs hate and have harassed Lavin in the past, it is clear that Wikipedia's editors are going to engage in open efforts to sterlize her entry and avoid any negative information to be included, no matter how well-sourced, undisputed, and newsworthy it is (especially newsworthy and worthy of public knowledge given that she makes her living making very serious negative allegations about others). I have absolute faith that these simple facts will fall on deaf ears and am not going to engage in this anymore. I am not a Wikipedia insider and will not be taken seriously no matter what I say. UnaMacchia (talk) 13:49, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

she makes her living making very serious negative allegations about others No she doesn't. And this wasn't part of her work, and not an allegation. You shouldn't believe ragebait on the internet. Polygnotus (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Her written work, through which she makes a living, absolutely does, unless you don't think fascism is a negative I suppose. In any event, her credibility on speaking about members of the right wing is absolutely of public interest. There is absolutely no basis for the removal of this information from the page other than out of an improper attempt to burnish her public image. UnaMacchia (talk) 14:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

See argumentum ad nauseam, repeating yourself (and editwarring) does not make your argument stronger. Her written work, through which she makes a living, absolutely does nonsense. Polygnotus (talk) 14:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Jesus Christ. "No she doesn't" is what kind of logical fallacy? Argument ad nuh uh? UnaMacchia (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Pretty sure argumentum ad nuh uh falls under proof by assertion and/or its cousin Appeal to the stone. The burden of proof lies with the person who is making a claim. And what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. See also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ Polygnotus (talk) 14:11, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Some of these are better sources. Like I say, you need to seek consensus on the talk page, but reliable sources is a good start in that direction. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:33, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Polygnotus (talk) 13:15, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Why should YOUR chosen content be the default? You are engaging in the same war. UnaMacchia (talk) 13:16, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. Polygnotus (talk) 13:19, 27 March 2025 (UTC)