User talk:Bssmith117

Welcome!

Hello, Bssmith117, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 11:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

February 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Dominion of Melchizedek has been reverted.
Your edit here to Dominion of Melchizedek was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/user/dpashore) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 11:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Yopie (talk) 17:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

DoM and conflict of interest

There's a chance, given your edit history and the similarity of you name to the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs on the DoM's website, for a conflict of interest to exist here. Either way, you'll find adding material is far easier if you can get something halfway like a reliable source to run a story on the shiny, new, hopefully non-fraudulent DoM.

If you want things like the motto changed, then a statement on the DoM website is fine for that (although the fact the seal remains unchanged will be problematic). Likewise, if you want to distance yourselves from the previous activity, then a statement will help (although the language here will treat it as an unverified statement attributed to the DoM website). We can't have the unsupported detail/fluff that's recently been added to the DoM entry over on MicroWiki. Bromley86 (talk) 08:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk) - Thank you for your advisement on Conflict of Interest. Conflict of Interest or not, this particular page is skewed, bias, represents material from over a decade ago, and does not tell the accurate history (as stated on the Dominion of Melchizedek Talk page) or the current situation of the Dominion of Melchizedek today. From the beginning the statement - "was a unilaterally declared, internationally unrecognized micro nation known for facilitating large scale banking fraud in many parts of the world during the 1990s and early 2000s" is bias and false from the standpoint that the Dominion of Melchizedek is a recognized Ecclesiastical State with Treaties of Peace and Recognition from multiple Nation States. (every time I attempt to post those treaties they get removed..even if it comes from the DoM's Official Webpage, those Treaties are third party sources being signed by the Heads-of-State in which the Treaty is made). This statement is also an opinion and based on a source (Quatloos) whose links which are used as "sources" for his article are mostly non existent or dead today. Based on the amount of dead links, this site should not be classified as a "reliable source". The Dominion of Melchizedek is also engaged in humanitarian aid and Diplomatic Communications with other States such as Haiti, Liberia, Uganda, and the Dominican Republic. To claim that the DoM is unrecognized is completely false. To claim it is a cyber community is likewise false as we operate in the real world and do business in the real world. This is a problem when it comes to individuals who don't understand or know International law or who haven't taken the time to read the various treaties that are out there....i.e OAS Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, or the Vienna Convention Series, or Treaties on Domicile or Naturalization. OR THE LAW OF NATIONS.

Also, to begin the page with accusations about past criminality from individuals who were never charged as DoM members, rather as US Citizens for violating US laws and who were using the DoM for their own nefarious reasons, automatically puts a seed in the minds of those reading about DoM, that is negative.

There should be a notice that the information on this page is outdated and based on sources that are over a decade old at minimum. The best source of information comes from those who are directly involved with the State who are actively working to build their own society, like many other societies have done throughout man's existence. We follow and subscribe to the Law of Nations, like all other members of the Family of Nations. We are Peacefully Exercising our Right to Self Determination which all Nations agree ALL People have the right to do. We do not have Our own bank, nor do we create Our own currency, and we are not involved with anything related to the financial industry. We (the current Members of the DoM), do not subscribe to the Melchizedek Bible, in fact we have outright denounced it on Our Website. We are not engaged in War or the financing of such activities. WE focus on Humanitarian Aid and Education. You can Google Prime Minister David Williams (who was recognized by the US Courts in 2006 as an Ambassador for the Dominion of Melchizedek) and come up with all sorts of information about him and his website Matrix Solutions where he has been teaching about International Law and the Right of Self Determination for the past 5 years. He is the leader of DoM's current Administration, therefore to understand the current mindset and direction of the DoM, researching who he is and what he is about would go a long way towards bridging the gap between what is "perceived" to be the old DoM vs what the New and Current Members of the DoM are doing.

It is completely double-minded to hold current members of the DoM to past allegations of criminality by those who were never really members of the DoM by law (which is why they were never charged as members of DoM, but rather as US Citizens), when every new administration that takes over from the previous one states they should not be held accountable for the actions of the previous administration! The DoM has never gone away and there has been no reports of illegality AT ALL by the DoM in over a decade. There is not a State on this Planet that can make the same statement! But yet, Wikipedia continues to focus on the negative and continues to keep outdated and bias half truths on this page.

I am sure this will be a long road to cleaning up this page, but it will be cleaned up because it is asinine to hang onto allegations of past events without having any current information to balance the equation and create a neutral explanation of who the Dominion of Melchizedek is, what We are about and what We are doing. I have no intention of denying that which is true and accurate. We have no issue with helping to expand on some statements so that there is a deeper understanding of the situations alluded to. I am not here to "fluff" the State as something it is not or to make the DoM out to be a perfect State. No State is perfect because man is not perfect and all states are created by men of like mind who come together to secure Their interest and to separate themselves from the collusion of others that do not believe in the same things. WE are about Peace as stated in the LAW OF NATIONS: Book IV

PEACE is the reverse of war: it is that desirable state in which every one quietly enjoys his rights, or, if controverted, amicably discusses them by force of argument. Hobbes has had the boldness to assert, that war is the natural state of man. But if, by "the natural state of man," we understand (as reason requires that we should) that state to which he is destined and called by his nature, peace should rather be termed his natural state. For, it is the part of a rational being to terminate his differences by rational methods; whereas, it is the characteristic of the brute creation to decide theirs by force. Man, as we have already observed (Prelim. § 10), alone and destitute of succours, would necessarily be a very wretched creature. He stands in need of the intercourse and assistance of his species, in order to enjoy the sweets of life, to develop his faculties, and live in a manner suitable to his nature. Now, it is in peace alone that all these advantages are to be found: it is in peace that men respect, assist, and love each other: nor would they ever depart from that happy state, if they were not hurried on by the impetuosity of their passions, and blinded by the gross deceptions of self-love. What little we have said of the effects will be sufficient to give some idea of its various calamities; and it is an unfortunate circumstance for the human race, that the injustice of unprincipled men should so often render it inevitable.

The Declaration of Independence states this very clearly:

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." - The DoM has made its Declaration. Likewise the DOI States:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed".

The US Constitution clearly states that it will punish all offenses against the LAW OF NATIONS which is titled "PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF NATURE APPLIED TO THE CONDUCT AND AFFAIRS OF NATIONS AND SOVEREIGNS" This is what the Founders were referring to when they made Their statement in the beginning of Their Declaration.

Article 1; Section 8 - Paragraph 10 To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations

The DoM simply wants a neutral and real explanation/description of who and what it is. Bssmith117 (talk) 17:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

tl;dr. Bromley86 (talk) 17:51, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Case and Point! Another problem with today's "Soundbite" Generation. Can't even take time to read relevant information on such a serious topic. Forget the fact that I took time out of my busy schedule in order to attempt a serious dialogue about the content on this page. Regardless, it has been documented for future use when used as proof that diligent dialogue has been attempted.

Bssmith117 (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Again, please refrain from editing an article which you are intimately involved with. If you want to edit WP, there's plenty of pages where you don't have a COI. Cheers, Bromley86 (talk) 00:50, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Bromley86, please give me the credentials which give you the authority and knowledge base to edit this page or any page regarding societies developing themselves in accordance with International law. The introduction to this page is highly inaccurate and further, there is no such quote from the cited source attached to the introductory statement. This is highly disingenuous and not proper procedure for making claims about something which you know little to nothing about outside of articles you find online that are over 10 years old.

Provide me proof that quatloos, the Security and Exchange Commissions, The Comptroller of the United States or you have the authority to determine which states are recognized in International law and then we can have an honest and true discussion. The fact of the matter is you or any of the entities listed above do not. That power is reserved for the State Department of the United States and similar departments in other Nation States.

My team and I, regardless of what you consider a COI will continue to do what we can to see that this page is correct and reflect the RECOGNIZED State of the Dominion of Melchizedek. I don't know what why you have such personal involvement in this particular page or why you are so adamant about having neutral and factual information presented on this page, but regardless of your intentions and motivations, it does not change the reality of the DoM, who we are, what we do, and our Status under International law, something which is obviously outside your expertise. Bssmith117 (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The reason, Bssmith117, that Bromley86 is so adamant about having a neutral point of view not having a conflict of interest is because we have rules and policies that we, as editors here, must follow. This is partially because Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. We also have policies regarding that say that no one owns articles. Another policy says paid editors must say they are being paid and who is paying them. (That last one is from the Wikimedia Foundation Terms of Use and has legal ramification if not followed.) I've linked the text to all the policies I mentioned here to their respective policy pages if you care to read them. -- Gestrid (talk) 17:29, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

Your recent editing history at Dominion of Melchizedek shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doug Weller talk 18:04, 28 July 2016 (UTC)