User talk:UsernameRachel

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm ViperSnake151. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living person, but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 16:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm Moonriddengirl. I noticed that you recently removed some sourced content from Peter Youngren without explaining why. Wikipedia's purpose is to reflect in fair balance what reliable sources say about notable subjects. All information must be verifiable to a reliable source, and this is especially true when it comes to information on living people. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Neutrality, and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more information. Please note that Youngren's own website is of limited utility here; almost all information must be sourced to external sources.

In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. Please make sure that you not only cite reliable published sources for any information you add but do not removed information from reliable published sources - such as related to Youngren's activities in Finland - without a valid policy based explanation. Thanks! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request of Peter Youngren is not an acceptable reason for removing content. Wikipedia does not belong to Youngren, and the article is not his to control. If there are issues with content, please review Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help. If people continue to remove content outside of policy, the article is very likely to be locked so that it cannot be edited at all. Please do not continue blanking content without providing a policy-based explanation, as this may result in the individual blocking of your account. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:25, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you did leave a note at my talk page, which is appreciated, but explanation needs to be given at the article, preferably on the talk page. And I'm afraid that the explanation for the removal doesn't meet policy. The burden of evidence is met by the citation of reliable sources. There is nothing in the article on Youngren that does not have a source. If you dispute the sources that we are using in the article, please let us know if the content is retracted. The purpose of Wikipedia is to reflect what reliable sources say about notable subjects, and it is our goal to ensure that we accurately reflect what these sources say. Alternatively, if you can demonstrate that any particular source does not meet the rigorous requirements of our verifiability policy (see identifying reliable sources for more information), then the material substantiated only by that source will be removed. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:28, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see Talk:Peter Youngren#Review request. Hopefully, independent review will help resolve your concerns. While it is unlikely that all negative content about Youngren will be removed, perhaps independent reviewers will be able to achieve better balance by finding more positive sourced content and may also be able to determine if any of the sources being used are inconsistent with our reliable source guidelines. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:41, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, UsernameRachel. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:42, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks NeilN - that's the first explanation I've received that makes sense.