Talk:Alfredo del Mazo Maza

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Hi, can we discuss your recent updates here before posting them in the article? This is a biography of a living person, and absolute statements of fact about suspected electoral frauds may be considered an infringement of policy. If this is not proven by a court, we need to reflect that in the text as an "accusation". MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 05:02, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging you again after your recent update in his Personal life section. You cited that the long rule of the family suggested nepotism, but this is not found in the source provided. Please let me know if I'm wrong. This is a huge violation of WP:NPOV and may affect your editing privileges if you continue to add content this way. I would advise you to refrain from editing articles about Mexican politics. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 05:42, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry if I broke any guidelines, make it as neutral as it needs to be. But do not remove the strong accusations towards Alfredo del Mazo, allegedly commiting electoral fraud. Also, how do I know you are not a man paid by the corrupt mexican goverment, who is paid to keep the truth from being heard in wikipedia. You known the mexican goverment hires lots of bots to create fake support on facebook & Twitter, how do I know it does not extend to wikipedia? Removing my privileges will only result in the articles about mexican politics being all vainilla and shying away from the crimes of the politicians. I'm the one who has updated the governors lists of each state to reflect the ex-governors who have been officially declared criminals (most are from the PRI). Also, I have made huge contributions to Enrique Pe;a Nieto's article, making sure it reflect all the corupt things he has done in a neutral manner. Normally, I do tend to be more neutral, trust me. It's about making sure the historical records stays more true to what it actally is. We both know the man is a criminal, but due to guidelines we have to be neutral about it. I'll keep it in mind, just I warn you removing my editing privileges would be ahuge disservice towards mexican politics as a whole. Rosvel92 (talk) 05:59, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Rosvel92




 * Sorry if I broke any guidelines, make it as neutral as it needs to be. – I respectfully disagree. I clearly pointed out that you completely made up a claim about the source above (regarding nepotism). In addition, the updates are giving undue weight to the allegations. Is there a court trial going regarding this? Has del Mazo been legally accused by a court in Mexico or internationally for the crimes you claim? If not, it is just that – an allegation. The sources you are citing (Proceso, SinEmbargo, Aristegui Noticias, etc.) are leftist newspapers known for reporting anti-political establishment publications. It is fine if you use them on Wikipedia, but we cannot give undue weight or make absolute statements of fact about things they've "uncovered".


 * Also, how do I know you are not a man paid by the corrupt mexican goverment, who is paid to keep the truth from being heard in wikipedia. – I won't prove that I'm not a paid editor by the Mexican government. You know why? Because I'm not the one making/suggesting the claim. The burden of proof is on you. Now, judging by the lies you posted earlier (regarding nepotism) and the undue weight claims, I seriously think you are here to post an agenda. Please review controversial figures like Fidel Castro and Donald Trump to understand how to write articles about polarizing figures while being neutral. The articles of Enrique Peña Nieto and the Institutional Revolutionary Party are poorly written and give undue weight to "accusations". These need to be fixed.


 * Also, I have made huge contributions to Enrique Pe;a Nieto's article, making sure it reflect all the corupt things he has done in a neutral manner. – Has he been accused and found guilty by a court in Mexico or abroad? If not, you have a bias and are violating policy. I will review the article in more detail later.


 * It's about making sure the historical records stays more true to what it actally is.  – Wikipedia is not about truth. It is about information being verifiable, see WP:NOTTRUTH. Since the sources you've provided are just accussations from the left – and currently do not hold ground in a legal environment – I will have to trim them down to better reflect what is going on. Wikipedia is not a place to post "truths" or political agendas. Go elsewhere for that. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 14:47, 19 November 2017 (UTC)