Changes

::Although InfoWars has over 3 million subscribers and was more accurate that the New York Times (currently on the verge of bankruptcy) in predicting the outcome of the 2016 election, Wikipedia has categorically labeled InfoWars as a "fake news website" in the introductory paragraph about Alex Jones. Any attempts to alter this description on Wikipedia is met with swift resistance from a cabal of left-wing administrators whose goal it is to paint Jones as an illegitimate crackpot. While attempting to challenge the claim of InfoWars as a "fake news website," User:Boab was banned indefinitely from Wikipedia (by User:The Blade of the Northern Lights <ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Blade_of_the_Northern_Lights</ref> and User:Ian.thomson<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ian.thomson</ref>) for "Disruptive editing: Pushing fringe theories and displaying a belligerent BATTLEGROUND approach to disputes."<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boab&oldid=755441776</ref>

::Although InfoWars has over 3 million subscribers and was more accurate that the New York Times (currently on the verge of bankruptcy) in predicting the outcome of the 2016 election, Wikipedia has categorically labeled InfoWars as a "fake news website" in the introductory paragraph about Alex Jones. Any attempts to alter this description on Wikipedia is met with swift resistance from a cabal of left-wing administrators whose goal it is to paint Jones as an illegitimate crackpot. While attempting to challenge the claim of InfoWars as a "fake news website," User:Boab was banned indefinitely from Wikipedia (by User:The Blade of the Northern Lights <ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Blade_of_the_Northern_Lights</ref> and User:Ian.thomson<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ian.thomson</ref>) for "Disruptive editing: Pushing fringe theories and displaying a belligerent BATTLEGROUND approach to disputes."<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boab&oldid=755441776</ref>

#As of August 15, 2016, the article in En.[[wikipedia]] ("[]Murder of Seth Rich]]") had a ''motion to delete'' template on it, delete on grounds of not being notable, although at one point it was getting 1500 daily views.  It was so allegedly unnotable that a strong debate was generated there on the talk page and on the Delete Articles section, where editors essentially "voted" to Keep  vs. Delete, allegedly on the grounds of non-notability.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Murder_of_Seth_Rich</ref>  Among the arguments for deleting the article there was a repetitious reference to the talking point "conspiracy theory," though the article said nothing at all about a conspiracy theory.  Also, as of August 17, 2016, the Wiki editor who started this article, was officially blocked by an administrator.  His talk page said:  "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia."<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TradingJihadist</ref>  As of August 21, 2016, the motion to delete was denied on grounds of no consensus, although a derogatory false comment was attached attacking some of those who argued in favor of "Keep." Soon after, the article was summarily locked down until August 27, 2016, and a request for mediation was filed.   

*As of August 15, 2016, the article in En.[[wikipedia]] ("[]Murder of Seth Rich]]") had a ''motion to delete'' template on it, delete on grounds of not being notable, although at one point it was getting 1500 daily views.  It was so allegedly unnotable that a strong debate was generated there on the talk page and on the Delete Articles section, where editors essentially "voted" to Keep  vs. Delete, allegedly on the grounds of non-notability.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Murder_of_Seth_Rich</ref>  Among the arguments for deleting the article there was a repetitious reference to the talking point "conspiracy theory," though the article said nothing at all about a conspiracy theory.  Also, as of August 17, 2016, the Wiki editor who started this article, was officially blocked by an administrator.  His talk page said:  "You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia."<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TradingJihadist</ref>  As of August 21, 2016, the motion to delete was denied on grounds of no consensus, although a derogatory false comment was attached attacking some of those who argued in favor of "Keep." Soon after, the article was summarily locked down until August 27, 2016, and a request for mediation was filed.   

:Despite the fact that the article was not deleted, several details about the murder were deleted from the article by the same editors who advocated for deletion,<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Murder_of_Seth_Rich#List_of_excluded_items</ref> leaving the article a rather short stub article.  And as of August 24, 2016, there was a continuing debate and vote on the talk page of that article as to  

:Despite the fact that the article was not deleted, several details about the murder were deleted from the article by the same editors who advocated for deletion,<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Murder_of_Seth_Rich#List_of_excluded_items</ref> leaving the article a rather short stub article.  And as of August 24, 2016, there was a continuing debate and vote on the talk page of that article as to