User talk:Clarkwhyobvious2024

January 2024
Hello, I'm Panian513. I noticed that you recently removed content from Jimwell Torion 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 your 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. Panian513 05:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi Panian513,
 * I hope this message finds you well. While I may not have the pleasure of knowing you personally, I recently came across an article that I believe casts an undeserved negative light on someone. I've edited the page, considering that Wiki's strong domain age can perpetuate a less-than-flattering image even if the person has moved on from past mistakes.
 * It's important to recognize that people change, and judging them solely based on their history on the internet can be unfair. The repercussions extend to those connected to the individual, including their family. Living under the shadow of a past mistake can be challenging, and I believe it's time to shift the focus to a more positive narrative.
 * I've made these edits with the intention of fostering a more uplifting and encouraging perspective. Also, I was hoping to help my friend one of the family member of this person. I hope you find merit in these changes, and I'm open to further discussion on this matter.
 * Best regards,
 * Clarkwhyobvious2024 Clarkwhyobvious2024 (talk) 05:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply! It's nice to know that you share a positive view of Jimwell Torion. However, one of core policies of Wikipedia is neutrality. Trying to change an article from reporting the facts to creating a "more positive narrative" does not fit the purpose of Wikipedia. Editing an encyclopedia must be an exercise in restrained, unemotional objectivity.
 * Additionally, editing an article about a close relation is considered a conflict of interest, and is strongly discouraged, as it can be difficult to restrain one's bias when editing about a close connection. Panian513 05:29, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your thoughtful response! I truly appreciate your commitment to Wikipedia's core policy of neutrality. I understand the importance of maintaining an objective and unemotional stance in editing, and I respect the principles that guide the platform.
 * While I share your positive view of Jimwell Torion, I acknowledge the significance of avoiding conflicts of interest in editing. I assure you that my intention is not to compromise the neutrality of the article but rather to present a more comprehensive and accurate representation.
 * I am open to guidance on how we can navigate these concerns together while still ensuring the article adheres to Wikipedia's standards. Your expertise in maintaining a neutral perspective is invaluable, and I believe we can find a middle ground that aligns with the platform's principles.
 * Looking forward to finding a solution together. Clarkwhyobvious2024 (talk) 05:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Clarkwhyobvious2024! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Jimwell Torion several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree&#32;at, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)