User talk:Tzel1286

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Tzel1286! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 03:08, Tuesday, January 26, 2021 (UTC)

January 2021
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Samanta Roy Institute of Science and Technology. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 19:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok I get that but what makes the current version different then?? The point is this page is being used as a venting site for people unhappy with the founder of SIST. That is not the point of Wikipedia. This page has become tabloid material. And this isn't supposed to be a forum for grievances so how do we stop it from being POV? --Tzel1286 (talk) 19:52, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * There are multiple reliable sources that well-document the history at play of SIST. Your edits removed this reliably-sourced information and presented a sanitized picture of the organization. Indeed, the fact that you have made no edits outside of this narrow subject area raise doubts in my mind that you are here to properly build an encyclopedia rather than promoting your, or this group's agenda. I suspect there could be a conflict of interest at play as well, and you should carefully review those guidelines lest you be blocked from editing. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 21:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I used all the same kind of reliable sources the previous editor has and removed the accusations since they are all hearsay and media speculation. Isn't a sanitized picture what we want so as not to obstruct the facts of the entity this page is about? If not then I guess I don't understand the bias allowed to be presented here. And if the only resolution is to block my editing because I don't have an editorial resume of Wiki articles, then it sounds like you must have a conflict of interest as well since you are from the WI area. Not to mention the other editor ALSO has a "narrow subject area" ONLY involving SIST content. So what recourse is to be had to make this page non-biased??? I would say this falls under  Wiki's own definition of reliable sources "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."  Tzel1286 (talk) 22:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * You are misreading both WP:COI and the reliable source page. What you are quoting is a guideline for articles that are biographies of living people, which this page is not. Moreover, all the assertions in the article are reliably sourced. Also, simply being from the geographical area is not a conflict of interest. The fact that all your edits thus far are to this extremely niche topic make the prospect of a conflict of interest seem more likely than not. You will notice that in my revert, I deleted what the other author wrote as it, too, was not adhering to a neutral point of view. If you believe the page is a "tabloid" or the sources are unreliable, that is a problem for the reliable source noticeboard or the talk page. But, as I said, you cannot replace POV with POV. I fail how to see the article is anything but objective. Extensive interviews presented by the SPLC and Journal Sentinel are not "hearsay and media speculation." Tread carefully. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 22:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Alright then I will look into the WP:RSN because as you are saying if I am replacing POV with POV then their POV should be removed as well. I will not contest the SPLC and JS sources because I used them myself and if they were presenting them as if this is what has been put in the media and left out all their additional "source" secrets and alleged implications it would be fine. That is not the case and is quite clear to anyone who has followed this history. So, if I presented edits to that effect are they still going to get removed? Or because I appear to have a defensive interest my edits won't count? I'm not trying to be difficult, I really want to know. Tzel1286 (talk) 23:42, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The other POV was removed. The article as it is now, in my view, follows WP:NPOV. You are free to make constructive additions, but your edits, which functionally completely rewrote the article were obviously trying to portray the group in a positive light, totally violating WP:NPOV and casting doubt on sources, such as Dr. Samanta Roy traveled on business to and from Shawano, which prompted the media and locals to create an endless barrage of allegations, and Baseless allegations such as, religious leader, cult, cult members, group members, secretive, etc and The years of slanderous media coverage.... You also wrote an essay-like conclusion (To pursue...), which is against policy, and included a parting shot at the Southern Poverty Law Center (Ironically...) You are also blatantly lying about using the SPLC and Journal Sentinel sources, as you removed them when you functionally rewrote the page. If you try to right great wrongs this way, it probably won't end well. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 00:07, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * My bad, I had the Pioneer Press not Journal Sentinel sourced, but I did have SPLC still. Was I citing incorrectly then? Tzel1286 (talk) 00:18, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You removed the long investigative piece that much of the article was sourced to. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 00:20, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sent you an emailTzel1286 (talk) 00:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

No, if you want to discuss this further, you can do so on here. I do not take Wiki emails. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 00:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * See what I mean... thanks for the moderation at least Tzel1286 (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2021 (UTC)