User talk:Itoro-Udoh

Good Day

I Locked into my account only to discover I have been blocked Dough Weller because I edited an Article "Olumba Olumba" which I found to be inconsistent with what the religious group stand for. for an article as critical as this to stand global acceptance devoid of blasphemy and lies I believe, the Publisher of such should do all necessary findings and research by employing all necessary credible tools such as visiting the personality websites, His religious Headquarters, having one on one discussions with the person and His followers, make necessary phone calls and send emails to their appropriate quarters. The essence of this is to ensure the article is not one side and is never used as a tool to blaspheme, mock or attack the subject. I believe centring the said article just from one blog post. Seems to be biased. In Nigeria where I am from, bloggers are never regarded as credible because the majority of them due to the economic meltdown and hunger resort to blogging as their career and they can twerk any post, filling it with lies just to drive traffic to their page. for record purposes, I don't have any intention and will never harbour such to enforce any religion on anyone, but I think and believe any information published on Wikipedia should be well researched for credibility purposes; for the credibility of the said article, I have read different articles, publications and blog posts about the said personality and I see the information in the article is written not for information and reference purposes but to defame the said personality, some of the websites publications I reviewed were;

1). https://www.bcs-uk.org/olumba-olumba-obu/who-is-this-man-ooo/#

2). https://ooo-bcsonline.org/

3. https://bcs-egc.org/

4). https://www.bcs-uk.org/

5). http://nktnewsonline.com/

6). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8okgd35L1BI&t=490s (interview with Leader Olumba Olumba Obu).

7). https://books.google.com.ng/books?id=aemyDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_book_similarbooks#v=onepage&q&f=false

8). https://www.amazon.com/EVERLASTING-GOSPEL-3-Olumba-Obu-ebook/dp/B08GJ6MFQN/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=2CSX4NIZJX152&keywords=everlasting+gospel+of+leader+olumba+olumba+obu&qid=1655373488&s=books&sprefix=everlasting+gosple+of+leader+olumba+olumba+obu%2Cstripbooks-intl-ship%2C340&sr=1-1-fkmr0 (religious book published by Leader Olumba Olumba Obu

9). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14725840802223549

10). https://books.google.com.ng/books?id=aemyDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_book_similarbooks#v=onepage&q&f=false

11). https://cdn.scoopernews.com/static/half/detail/2243/11214234.html?

12). https://books.google.com.ng/books?id=aemyDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_book_similarbooks#v=onepage&q&f=false

well if after providing all these channels for research purposes and the team feel I deserve being blocked, I will consider that the said article was published not for information purpose but to mislead the public. I will also see Wikipedia as a tool not to inform but to mislead. My Name is Itoro Archibong Udoh, resided in Cross River State, Nigeria and I have information about Leader Olumba Olumba Obu, His Religion and His Family which non has I Wish you all a beautiful life, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itoro-Udoh (talk • contribs)


 * If you wish to appeal your block, please make use of this template:  Otherwise, administrators will never notice your appeal and not respond.


 * Please also be aware that any material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add content solely because they believe it is true, nor delete content they believe to be untrue, unless they have verified beforehand with a reliable source. Essay link: Verifiability, not truth


 * A reliable source is defined as a source with an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. This heavily favours mainstream journalism, academic press, and reputable publishers of books, newspapers and magazines. Sources affiliated with the subject are called primary sources (for example, the subject's own website or interviews with them). These can be used to verify basic facts and figures, but little else. Self-published sources have no editorial oversight and are almost always not acceptable - these include blogs, social media, and message forums.


 * If you have a content dispute, you should raise the issue on the article's talk page to begin a process of discussion and compromise. Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental editorial model and should be the goal of all editors. If that fails to resolve the disagreement, there are further dispute resolution measures available. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:09, 16 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Sources 7, 8, 10 and 12 are self-published and 3 are the same book for example. See also WP:NPOV and WP:PRIMARY. We cannot in any way use your own knowledge of experience. Doug Weller  talk 15:47, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * how about other sources, source 6 specifically. one this i have to clear, true journalism is getting information from the different sources (the root) through one on one interview. anything contrary is assumption. i cannot publish anything about a given religion, person or country without going to the source to make deep research. Brother if you want to get full information about the said religion. be bold enough to put them on one on one zoom interview, social media interview, follow them up on their social media space and watch their dealing and use all information gotten to enrich this content. if you can't do that. then you are not promoting quality information on wikipedia, rather you are using it to spread false information about a religion you know know nothing about. Itoro-Udoh (talk) 10:14, 9 September 2022 (UTC)