User talk:Mswsu

Please reign in POV on DSS and Singh articles
Greetings, you are to be commended for adding properly cited facts regarding the dismissal of charges against Singh. This information was grievously lacking, so good on you. However, you have pushed past neutrality and into bias by adding such terms as "conspiracy", trickster, etc. Please continue to add the great well-documented citations that you did, but refrain from such judgemental/emotional language. The bare facts that the charges were dismissed due to revealed bribery of testifiers, etc. speaks sufficiently to the topic, and readers can form their own opinions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You started off slow, but now you're clearly POV-pushing on the DSS article. You've removed cited info about land-grabs, replaced it with DSS blogs, and given inappropriate section titles like "the reality". I ask you again to refrain from this highly suspect POV pushing. I will be going through the article and deleting any such POV-pushing you've introduced, so you're making more work for hard-working neutral editors. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I have put out signficant effort to reduce the overlap between the Dera Sacha Sauda and Ram Rahim Singh articles. I have also more-or-less cleaned and streamlined the DSS article, so I hope you find it to be neutral and thorough. Again, I ask you not to introduce POV such as "with his own pious hands." I'd hope we can agree that the article is more professional and credible when written with a neutral tone, and that both of the articles are now easier to read since they have been deconflicted and streamlined. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)