User talk:OneTF

Welcome!
Hello, OneTF, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to  The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Introduction tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. —C.Fred (talk) 02:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

July 2021
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Steven M. Greer, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 02:51, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

A lengthy welcome
Hi OneTF. Welcome to Wikipedia. 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 in collaboration.

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.

If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

If you find yourself in a disagreement with another editor, it's best to discuss the matter on the relevant talk page.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Hipal (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I’m making edits so that everything is true and accurate, without ones own opinions/beliefs. & I’m actually not changing any of the information. I’m also not discrediting or trying to make facts seem not credible. I’m just reporting. & again actually, I’m not really changing any of the info at all. I’m just editing and removing critic wording. That’s not what Wikipedia is for. To critic the facts.

Make sure the facts are being reported without assuming that they are assumptions, &/or making the facts seem questionable, &/or edits that serve an editors own agenda/own beliefs or lack thereof to make information seem not credible with careful selection of wording. Also make sure that things/people are not being labeled as something they are not.

Wiki is meant to serve the world with facts, not facts and opinions of them.

It’s a disservice to the world to by not providing plain facts and instead manipulating the facts.

Stop labeling people especially if that’s not what they say they are/identify as/actual certified profession. What we do know is what has been reported by Steven Greer and his team and team of more than 900 military officials, and the most credible. & who most his team actually consist of. Who’s a more reliable source - the news and online news/internet articles that are from random people/news/news reporters? or the people involved in the facts themselves/situations the military officials? Steven Greer doesn’t identify as a “ufologist”. He has said so himself. What we do know and can say is that HE IS a retired doctor, he is a spokesman for military officials, & he is a researcher. & there’s so much more info that can be gathered about his life. Isn’t that how info on all these famous celebs are reported here? Through what THEY say. Not what reporters say. We know famous people’s bios mostly because of what info THEY provided about themselves to the public. That’s how wikis are written about them.

& if someone identifies as a female but they’re born male, you’re not going to come on here and says he’s female. You’re going to identify him here as female. But when it’s Steven Greer and people that are directly involved with military officials and operations/giving briefings to presidents, you’re going to call him a “ufoligist” & say every bit of info is “alleged” & “claims”? Then go say that about the more famous people - that they “allege” they’re from so and so. & that they “claim” they have a brother & that they “claim” they went to this school & that they “allege” that they have met with other well known people when there’s clear proof and evidence of the meetings.

You & other editors are either are not doing the research, frankly being ignorant, or purposely manipulating facts for your own agenda/beliefs.

Please have some common sense and ignore ignorance and manipulation of someone’s life details to appear as discredited just because you don’t believe in it/are a supporter or not.

Leave biases and discrediting out of ANYBODY'S life facts & info.

So stop saying he & his team and the military officials “alleges”. The definition of allege is to assert without proof/claim or assert that someone has done something wrong typically without proof that this is the case. 1. THE MILITARY/GOVERNMENT/SCIENTIST OFFICIALS (not just Steven Greer) have shown, confirmed, & are actually the ones WHO PROVIDED the proof & facts. 2. Steven Greer, his team, or the officials that have made the statements have done nothing wrong. & that is clear. Let’s discuss. I know what I’m doing. I don’t need to be a tech geek/tech professor to know how to operate here. The guidelines are clear and with my last edits I made sure (EVEN MORE than in my first edits) to make sure all the same info is still there. Resources & all. It’s actually keeping a neutral point of view, not a biased/negative/critic point of view that you and most editors here are providing. Again, leave your own limiting beliefs out of this and just report the facts, without attempting to discredit them. Your job is to just report the facts.

If you can’t report the facts NEUTRALLY, and just that, then follow your own advice. ⬇️

“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 “

BTW, EVERYTHING is contentious. The world and life is contentious. OneTF (talk) 18:24, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If you don't have the time or inclination to learn Wikipedia's policies and how to apply them, then I strongly suggest that you avoid topics where it is required that all editors follow them closely. Steven Greer falls under multiple sanctions: WP:ARBBLP and WP:ARBPS. Please be careful with how you continue. --Hipal (talk) 20:32, 7 July 2021 (UTC)