User talk:W ponds

Welcome!
  Hello, W ponds!  Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

  Getting Started

Tutorial Learn everything you need to know to get started. Introduction to contributing • Editing

• Referencing

• Images

• Tables

• Policies and guidelines

• Talk pages

• Navigating

• Manual of Style

The Teahouse Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips 
 * Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
 * It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
 * If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
 * Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
 * When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
 * If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
 * Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Doug Weller  talk 12:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 12:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 12:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Please read the restrictions listed at the top of Talk:Judicial Watch before editing it again
Or else you'll risk being blocked. Doug Weller talk 12:12, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

You've continued to revert despite my warning above
I'll give you a pass as you might not have seen this, but I need a response. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello Doug,
 * I stumbled across the Judicial Watch page quite by accident but when reading I noticed how one-sided and biased it was. It reads more like an editorial from a newspaper than an encyclopedic entry as it should. I had not edited anything on Wikipedia in quite a while but decided to go ahead and "help out". I assumed that some bad actors had made their way into the page and skewered it as they have so many other pages. There is much wrong with the entire Wiki all the way to its sources but all I attempted to do was alter the first couple of paragraphs so that the Wiki at least starts out sounding like it is neutral. The more you read the more you realize this sounds like a hit piece against Judicial Watch and not a neutral account of the organization's positions and activities. A simple web search will find many credible accounts that conflict with the ones stated and "sourced" within the Wiki. I found the whole page to be
 * For the record I did not "revert" as you claim but reworded my initial edit. I didn't even make the same edits the second time. I'm not sure how that could be considered "reverting"?
 * I just re-read the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Introduction_to_policies_and_guidelines/neutrality_quiz page and still feel that I accurately assessed the page to be non-compliant as written. W ponds (talk) 23:33, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Policy states “ An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes or manually reverses other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert.” You did that. Doug Weller  talk 08:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)