Talk:Fakemink
Add topic| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
fakemink
[edit]Fakemink attended catholic school in Basildon, Essex. Keinepepsi334 (talk) 19:13, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
Origin
[edit]He's told multiple people that he's from Basildon 31.205.4.118 (talk) 22:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
Reverted edits with reliable sources
[edit]An edit by Dwarfroe reverted sourced material with the explanation that the statements were redundant and could be grouped around a single claim.
I’d like to clarify that the reverted content was supported by citations and was intended to reflect multiple independently sourced descriptions, not a single assertion. Per WP:V and WP:NPOV, multiple reliable sources describing the same characteristic can be appropriate when they add context or reflect how sources characterize the subject.
If the concern is WP:UNDUE or WP:WEIGHT, I’m open to consolidating wording rather than removing sourced material entirely. I’d appreciate input on whether consolidation would better address this than full removal.
The material added does in fact add lots of value to the article, and relates directly to the subject matter of his work. Sarah serafin (talk) 21:02, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
- All of the statements you've added to the article could be classified as original research. If you really feel that this information should be added, first find reliable, secondary sources. - dwarfroe (talk / contr) 04:20, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
terrified page on wikipedia
[edit]any plans for a page on his new album Ssasadda (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2026 (UTC)