User talk:2001:56A:74B2:8500:F1CF:404:4976:797C

March 2024
Hello, I'm Maliner. I noticed that you recently removed content from Falling Down without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Maliner (talk) 06:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * No it was not a mistake. And yes I adequately explained why. 2001:56A:74B2:8500:F1CF:404:4976:797C (talk) 06:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Falling Down. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. signed,SpringProof talk 06:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Excuse me! I did not add anything! I simply REMOVED commentary, biased viewpoints and biased analysis. Do not accuse me of something I did not do! 2001:56A:74B2:8500:F1CF:404:4976:797C (talk) 06:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the problem here, and the reason why you are being reverted by the other editors is because you are violating Wikipedia's policy on the neutral point of view.
 * It is quite common in film articles to mention critical reception by publications which are well respected in the film word. Just because you don't agree with what a critic says does mean you get to censor their opinion - it is Wikipedia's job to hold all opinions together in a neutral manner (giving them due weight per WP:FRINGE), be they far-left, far-right, supportive or unsupportive of a film. All the opinions of the critics deserve to be written about equally because they are by equally respected critics in equally respected publications. Molecular  Pilot  Let&apos;s talk!  06:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Excuse me - well respected? And why is it that only a far-left take of the film is included in later opinions? 2001:56A:74B2:8500:F1CF:404:4976:797C (talk) 06:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi! Something got messed up with my reply, this is just a ping to check the comment below I left regarding consensus. It may seem "far-left" to you (because of biases) but others (not necessarily myself, I don't really know or care enough about this to have an opinion!) in the film Wikipedia world, like the editors who reverted you, may think differently so we should work together to overcome these biases! Molecular  Pilot  Let&apos;s talk!  06:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Did you accuse me there or imply that I am indeed the one with biases..? I'm simply trying to make wiki more neutral and less radical and intolerant. 2001:56A:74B2:8500:F1CF:404:4976:797C (talk) 06:38, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh definitely not!! I'm just trying to suggest working with other editors on the talk page to collectively overcome biases (we all have them - but together they may cancel each other out!). Molecular  Pilot  Let&apos;s talk!  06:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I forgot to mention this, but you should also gather community consensus on the Article's talk page about the potential biases/reputability problems before deleting large segments of an article. You, yourself, might have biases about the reputability of these sources, and so you should work together with other editors to determine in a neutral manner if these sources are deserving of due weight. Molecular  Pilot  Let&apos;s talk!  06:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Falling Down, you may be blocked from editing. signed,SpringProof talk 06:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Neutral point of view policy? You're having a laugh. Wikipedia is so compromised. 2001:56A:74B2:8500:F1CF:404:4976:797C (talk) 06:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)