User talk:Surfer x


 * }

January 2014
Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Yevgeny Roizman, with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 08:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Yevgeny Roizman. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators can block users from editing if they repeatedly vandalize. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:38, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Yevgeny Roizman
The problem was that you removed content from Yevgeny Roizman that was sourced with an unsourced statement which appeared to be personal opinion. People often whitewash articles to give the topic a better image. Without a lot of work, it would have been difficult to determine if that was the case with Yevgeny Roizman. So, the responsibility for demonstrating otherwise is the editor's (your) responsibility. The policy that may apply here is WP:UNDUE (aka weight).

People want to be able to verify information on Wikipedia. So, significant edits need have their content cited using reliable sources. See verifiablity. This means that information must be published, and presumably vetted, by reliable groups and individuals. You should familiarize yourself with the policy in these pages.

UNDUE also means that the negative content should not take too much of the article. Thought it may or may not be UNDUE to have the negative content there at all. The negative content on a well-established mass-murderer would not be UNDUE.

If you feel up to the task, you can edit the article directly. Just be sure to cite sources and to not to remove information that is correct, without it being WP:UNDUE. What is DUE or UNDUE is a subjective matter, so be careful and justify removal carefully. Leave good wp:edit summaries. Discuss your reasoning on the talk page if it may not be clear in the wp:edit summaries. You can leave an edit summary of "See talk - section name" instead of putting it all in the edit summary.

Another option is to go to the talk page talk:Yevgeny Roizmanand put what you want done then add at the top. Put "pending edit request" an only add the "Request edit" when you are done otherwise people may start commenting / judging before you are ready. See template:request edit. Make sure to add sources that are considered reliable sources (RS). Anything that you want removed needs to be justified with RS as well.

If you still have problems, use Dispute resolution. I won't go through the process as it is described well there.

If after using Dispute Resolution, there are continuing problems, the 'last resort would be Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (BLPN). This may get a large number of people involved and it should be used as a last resort. Using BLPN often backfires when the poster is being dishonest. Not to say that you are, but just be aware.

BLPN is also a good place to go to see how other contentious issues were resolved. You can find a similar article / situation and then go to that article, click on "View history" and see what people have done. (One reason for using the edit summary).

Hope this helps! Jim1138 (talk) 20:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I also added a welcome section at the top for your reference. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)