User talk:Maxmibsb
Welcome!
Hello, Maxmibsb! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place
{{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking  or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. |
|---|
|
|
Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 22:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. If you have questions, please contact me or ask at the Arbitration Committee Clerks Noticeboard. Mellk (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm glad I can be of assistance - since you're here, I'd like to request that you act as a neutral arbiter on a topic that a certain user keeps editing that goes against historical consensus and against the grain Maxmibsb (talk) 18:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure if I am the best candidate for this role. If you find that you cannot come to an agreement on the talk page, it is worth looking at dispute resolution. For example, if it is just a disagreement between two parties, then you can request a third opinion. My suggestion would be to refrain from making any kind of personal attacks, even if you believe that you are right, as this often leads to blocks. Mellk (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I will look to ask for mediation should the issue persist. This particular individual is difficult to reconcile and find a compromise with given that they have a pretty long history of distorting pages towards a russian centric / soviet viewpoint (see their bans for instance). Me pointing this out should not be considered an attack, as this was not meant, rather I wish to draw the individual's attention towards the fact that they are going against consensus and removing difficult to dispute facts that may jeopardize the neutrality of an already contentious article. I don't personally agree with much of the page (even though I belong to the group in question unlike this individual), but that doesn't give me an excuse to prop up my agenda on it. Maxmibsb (talk) 18:46, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- You can point this out in the correct venue, but suggesting that someone might be getting paid for their editing very much counts as an aspersion. Mellk (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I will look to ask for mediation should the issue persist. This particular individual is difficult to reconcile and find a compromise with given that they have a pretty long history of distorting pages towards a russian centric / soviet viewpoint (see their bans for instance). Me pointing this out should not be considered an attack, as this was not meant, rather I wish to draw the individual's attention towards the fact that they are going against consensus and removing difficult to dispute facts that may jeopardize the neutrality of an already contentious article. I don't personally agree with much of the page (even though I belong to the group in question unlike this individual), but that doesn't give me an excuse to prop up my agenda on it. Maxmibsb (talk) 18:46, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure if I am the best candidate for this role. If you find that you cannot come to an agreement on the talk page, it is worth looking at dispute resolution. For example, if it is just a disagreement between two parties, then you can request a third opinion. My suggestion would be to refrain from making any kind of personal attacks, even if you believe that you are right, as this often leads to blocks. Mellk (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)