User talk:Peruviansummer

I'm not gonna make this page look fancy.
In real life, I do finance stuff. On the wide web, I do commissions for people wanting art drawn : )

Democracy dies in the darkness and a world of easily accessible information is a free world.

January 2024
Hello, I'm TylerBurden. I noticed that you removed topically relevant content from Ural-4320. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, Tyler. I typically remove that video as it contains (in my opinion) little relevancy to the topic. Please remember that the guidelines (I did refer to them!) state that offensive or otherwise sensitive materials (such as gore) are to be avoided in topics whereas their usage would make them less relevant, informative, accurate, and should only be used if no equally suitable alternative is available.; "In particular, when a cited quotation contains words that may be offensive, it should not be censored. Words and images that would be considered offensive, profane, or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternatives are available." Direct quote from; NOTCENSORED and the Main Page In reference to the particular media that I remove from Ural-4320, I believe that the video in it's entirety adds little to the article's relevancy and informative value. Furthermore, I believe that a suitable replacement (alternative, as prescribed by the provided quote) would be a still image of the truck in it's destroyed state.
 * If the media in-question was posted in an article that was referencing or providing information on the topic of something like looting in war, plundering, war spoils, prize of war, or similar, i would see that the video may be informative and relevant to the topic. However, reiterating my prior point, I believe that an article which shows warfighters investigating a destroyed Ural-4320 and showcases a corpse within the first 30 seconds of the frame (the driver is deceased and laying on the steering wheel) holds little relevancy to an article which primarily focuses on the specification, developmental history and variants of the Ural-4320. Furthermore, I believe that it does not further the informative value of the article. If an addendum was added to the section of the Ural-4320 that provided further information to the operational history of the Ural-4320 in the Russo-Ukrainian War, then the media you typically add to that page may become relevant.
 * I hope you have a pleasant day!:) Peruviansummer (talk) 19:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It is a military vehicle, the video shows it directly in military use and how it can be affected by an ambush. Unfortunately, war is gory, and hiding that goes against the very idea of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, which is why policies such as WP:NOTCENSORED exist. I understand where you're coming from and in different instances I might agree, but not on an article about a military vehicle. You seem to have linked to an essay which is fine as a way to express your views, but it's not policy nor has such views overriden the actual policy, which is that Wikipedia is not censored. TylerBurden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2024 (UTC)