Talk:Joe Biggs

"While serving in Afghanistan as an Army sergeant" & "having just departed the Army on medical retirement."

It is also an embarassing wealth of biographical info. https://www.salon.com/2021/01/22/from-back-the-blue-to-back-the-yellow-how-joe-biggs-and-the-proud-boys-turned-on-the-police/ TuffStuffMcG (talk) 00:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

That looks good if used carefully, actually! Thanks! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

Before I remove mentions of the subject being an insurrectionist or the event labeled an insurrection I do want to discuss it here. There was a discussion on usage and forms of "insurrection". Based on the conversations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2021_storming_of_the_United_States_Capitol/Archive_16#When_WP%3ABLPCRIME_does_and_does_not_apply and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#2021_storming_of_the_United_States_Capitol . It appears the consensus is that discussing individuals usage and forms of "insurrection" are not consistent with wp:BLPCRIME since the individual was not convicted of the crime of Insurrection https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383.Yousef Raz (talk) 06:15, 19 May 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

I removed the mentions. None of the cited sources for "insurrectionist" actually call him an "insurrectionist". starship .paint (exalt) 06:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC) [reply ]

Why would you remove "insurrection"? This WAS an insurrection, carried out by domestic terrorists. Call it what it is. Biggs is a terrorist and always will be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.253.76 (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Wikipedia:Verifiability. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 13:40, 18 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

What prompted archival of the most recent section of this talk page that previously barely amounted to 3.5 kilobytes, matching none of the factors listed at Help:Archiving a talk page? Was the page too unwieldy to navigate with three whole sections? Were those 412 bytes causing server degradation and complicating loading the page for editors and readers? Was 55.92 days too long to leave a stagnant discussion on the page, but if so, why aren't the unconscionably-older sections also archived? Was the discussion about a USA Today source too repugnant to leave visible to the casual reader or editor? There was no explanation given for the unusual archival, so I'm just hoping anybody here can point me to another policy, guideline, or manual-of-style page that explains. Thanks, all! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 01:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

I considered the request resolved. Not a big deal, feel free to undo/unarchive if you feel strongly. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

I suppose it was resolved, but Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Archiving only says, As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB in wikitext or has numerous resolved or stale discussions. I've also just never seen something so quickly hidden on such a small talk page, nor a talk page that averages one whole comment every 6.18 months. I appreciate your leave, but administrators've prohibited such unarchivals in the past, and I don't care to risk anyone's ire tonight. I was just super-confused, so thanks for the reply! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 02:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

I cannot fathom what the edit-warring IPs are trying to accomplish, so I'm explaining here the reasons I'll just rollback any future similar edits:

I'm removing original research. I'm removing claims that are contradicted by sourced & cited prose in the body IAW Wikipedia:Verifiability & WP:INFOBOX. Regardless of how stupid or [bullshit] the IP contributors feel about it, the ultimate length of the Biggs' imprisonment (8.2 percent) is relevant & necessary information.

The policies involved aren't up for debate via edit-warring, but I'm happy to continue this discussion with any editors who're so inclined. In the meantime, however, I will rollback further similar edits, escalating if necessary. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]