User talk:Jack Redfield

Answer
WP:BALASP "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news."

WP:SYNTH "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source."

WP:CRITS "Sections or article titles should generally not include the word "controversies""

Please stick to WP:BRD--Asqueladd (talk) 01:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Why do you ask me on why did I undo your edit while you keep on adding it, instead of adressing the concerns in the talk page?--Asqueladd (talk) 15:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

That must have been before I saw this. I haven't combined material from different sources. And why do you delete it instead of fixing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Redfield (talk • contribs)
 * You have twisted one source to imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source. Why should I fix something that is mostly WP:UNDUE? Could you make the case that including the story in any form whatsoever is not a case of recentism violating WP:BALASP?--Asqueladd (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. An edit that you recently made to Russian Mennonite seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The number formatting was wrong, and there were other problems. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)