User talk:Match150

Welcome!
Hi Match150! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Richard Stanley (director) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Richard Stanley (director). Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 13:26, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

look at anyone in entertainment and you will allegations....Asia Argento, weinstein (before his case), spacey..... wiki has already published allegations of this type.....and we will make sure they are published now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Match150 (talk • contribs)
 * Again, please follow No personal attacks. It is an English Wikipedia guideline, and you may be blocked if you continue to do so. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 12:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I have not attacked anyone here. I just stated a fact: many people, from politicians to hollywood personalities have allegations on their page that have not been proven in court. They have been reported in media. Yet, the allegations stays on the wikipedia page. The fact that this rule does not apply here is suspect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Match150 (talk • contribs)
 * Ok, please do not attack anyone in the future. Also, please sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ ) so users can tell who posted the message. From what I can tell, JBW is saying you are giving the allegations undue weight, and that someone making a blog post is insufficient notability to put it on an article. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 16:56, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Problems with editing at Richard Stanley (director)

 * Wikipedia's policy on reporting about living persons does not permit publishing accusations of criminal actions unless the person concerned has been convicted.
 * It is no defence to say that you are referring to the accusations as "allegations", not asserting that they are facts.
 * Nor is it a defence to say that "it is fact that allegations exist"; many things exist that are not suitable for publishing on Wikipedia, for many reasons.
 * The fact that someone has posted an accusation in a blog does not make it acceptable to publicise that accusation on Wikipedia, not matter how many quotation marks you put round it.
 * Posting material in a Wikipedia article because you think "the public need to know" is contrary to the whole purpose of Wikipedia: we do not act as a medium for promoting a campaign or for publicising anything. JBW (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed the BLP policy, and I now realise that, while policy does contain provision against reporting unproven allegations, that is not such a total ban on doing so as I thought. JBW (talk) 22:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)