User talk:Nucleartaco123

An extended welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 05:19, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Addressing content disputes
Hi Nucleartaco123. Dispute resolution gives details on how to address disputes. Make your case on the article talk page, identifying references and policies that support your statement. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * That's ridiculous, there is no dispute. You never took that step, and you're not an admin or someone who should have more say over another. I'm reverting my edit back and I'll be happy to leave an explanation why on the talk page. Again, as it stands, your edits have generated a vague and misquoted account of someone being accused of sexual harassment with very little detail. It is unfair to both the individual the article is about and readers of the article to leave it in its current state. Nucleartaco123 (talk) 12:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding.
 * Let's be clear, this is a dispute.
 * Thanks for joining the talk page discussion.
 * I agree that the content as needs work.
 * Let's continue to discuss on the article talk page. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)