User talk:Ruezart

December 2023
Welcome to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, content you added to a Wikipedia article appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint, and appears to have given undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ertal72 (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


 * How do we discuss this in scientific factual context?
 * As an award winning credenialed educator I have studied this matter and will be happy to address, one at a time, the issues someone on your side is choosing to challenge.
 * Paul Ruez, M.Ed.
 * Educator
 * Former Combat Correspondent Photographer
 * Wikipedia Donor 2600:1700:A3E0:F300:994F:71D9:DC47:BA63 (talk) 02:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Paul - I assure you I do not have a "side" to take on the article George Adamski that Ruezart edited. The edits had to be reverted because they disproportionately represented fringe perspectives at odds with consensus of  reliable sources. They also had significant problems with WP:SELFSOURCE.
 * All the best - Ertal72 (talk) 03:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Factual representation of Adamski On Wikipedia
Thank you for your reply. To be totally neutral and open let’s take it step by step. Please tell me the first instance of unacceptable verbiage you are objecting to. 2600:1700:A3E0:F300:994F:71D9:DC47:BA63 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The hyperlinks in my reply lead to Wikipedia guidelines which may help explain the cause for the reversions. I'm sorry to say I lack the time and patience to discuss this at length. If you have an issue with the substance or composition of the article, I encourage you to open a discussion about it at Talk:George Adamski. If you're confident that a change would be objective, balanced, and well-supported, then please make the edit with citations to reliable sources. A guide to adding references can be found at WP:REFB.
 * Given the major consensus by reliable sources regarding certain parts of the subject, it may be particularly helpful to review WP:UNDUE before making any edits. Ertal72 (talk) 04:46, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. I understand that customer service can be time consuming. I did not know that you filtered your information as you do and that is understandable. I will follow up as you suggested. Thank you for your time and patience. Paul Ruez, M.Ed. 2600:1700:A3E0:F300:7D06:421C:D5ED:EC54 (talk) 20:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)