User talk:Aryann1501

February 2021
Hello, I'm Twassman. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Eden Hazard seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Twassman &#91;Talk·Contribs&#93; 02:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Alright, I’ll make it seem more neutral Aryann1501 (talk) 02:17, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Eden Hazard. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Nigel757 (talk) 02:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I did make it neutral. He has been considered to be one of the best players in the league’s history. Many experts agree. Aryann1501 (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "The best" is not neutral. You are welcome to mention and cite who believes he is the best, or give statistics which show his ability, but stating it as a fact is clearly not neutral. — Twassman &#91;Talk·Contribs&#93; 02:31, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Mateo Kovačić, you may be blocked from editing. — Twassman &#91;Talk·Contribs&#93; 02:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Can I ask what I did wrong? It’s a neutral opinion and many believe so. Aryann1501 (talk) 02:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Saying he is one of the best players/wingers in the league’s history is ok considering he was considered the best in the league for 7 years even by Liverpool fans like Jamie Carragher. Don’t you know?

At his best, he also has been considered one of the best players in the world for a large part of his career until recently, si what’s wrong? Aryann1501 (talk) 02:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * What is wrong is that your edits are less than neutral, which Wikipedia has a policy on. as I stated, you can add objective facts on who considers him to be the best, and any metrics which support that. — Twassman &#91;Talk·Contribs&#93; 02:39, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Will it be more neutral if I say he had been “widely considered” to be one of the best players in the world for a large party of his career? Because it’s true, and right now the description is kind of dull and disrespectful. You can see the countless videos if you don’t believe me. Aryann1501 (talk) 02:44, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * If you can provide reliable sources of a majority opinion (and you cite them), then it's probably fine. Please read the neutral point-of-view policy if you want more information. — Twassman &#91;Talk·Contribs&#93; 02:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

If you’ve watched any football you’ll know the majority opinion but sure Aryann1501 (talk) 11:01, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

I’ve added reliable sources as well as footballer opinions. Hope the good enough now:) Aryann1501 (talk) 21:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Right now it says dribbling and passing. It should say (dribbling, creativity and passing) like before as he created one of the most chances in Europe in the last decade. If you can add the word creativity it will help. Aryann1501 (talk) 19:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)