User talk:Trump supporter 1776: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→January 2017: post-truth or alternative truth |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
I somewhat agree with you, however the people who primarily wrote this article (those from rationalwiki) also have a stake in this too as they are vehemently opposed to and vandalize conservapedia. [[User:Trump supporter 1776|Trump supporter 1776]] ([[User talk:Trump supporter 1776#top|talk]]) 12:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC) |
I somewhat agree with you, however the people who primarily wrote this article (those from rationalwiki) also have a stake in this too as they are vehemently opposed to and vandalize conservapedia. [[User:Trump supporter 1776|Trump supporter 1776]] ([[User talk:Trump supporter 1776#top|talk]]) 12:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC) |
||
:I would have to put citation needed on 'fact based' so could you keep it out until you have some citation showing evidence of that thanks? It looks more bible conservative stuff to me falling under what has started to be called post-truth or alternative-truth. [[User:Dmcq|Dmcq]] ([[User talk:Dmcq|talk]]) 12:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:45, 30 January 2017
Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Trump supporter 1776. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Conservapedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:
- avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
- instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
- when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
- avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
- exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Please also read WP:NPOV; your edit to it violates this policy. Thank you. JudgeRM (talk to me) 12:06, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
January 2017
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Conservapedia. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. JudgeRM (talk to me) 12:06, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
I somewhat agree with you, however the people who primarily wrote this article (those from rationalwiki) also have a stake in this too as they are vehemently opposed to and vandalize conservapedia. Trump supporter 1776 (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- I would have to put citation needed on 'fact based' so could you keep it out until you have some citation showing evidence of that thanks? It looks more bible conservative stuff to me falling under what has started to be called post-truth or alternative-truth. Dmcq (talk) 12:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)