User talk:5dondons

Welcome to the Wikipedia user discussion page for 5dondons.

• In order to make conversations go smoothly, please follow WP:TALK and WP:AGF when contributing to my talk page. Comments that don't may be immediately deleted.
  
• I will respond to your comment, and try to do so promptly, on your talk page if not here.
  
• Sign your post using four tildes ( -- ~~~~ )
  

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

A lengthy welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily in collaboration.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

If you find yourself in a disagreement with another editor, it's best to discuss the matter on the relevant talk page.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Hipal (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I appreciate the advice, and I want to express that my focus has been on ensuring the neutrality and accuracy of the article. My edits have been made with the intention of adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and presenting a balanced view.

I understand the significance of the conflict of interest policy, and I want to assure you that my contributions are not driven by any personal or promotional agenda. I am committed to constructive collaboration and am open to feedback that can help enhance the article's quality while maintaining the standards Wikipedia has set. 5dondons (talk) 16:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

NO conflict of interest then? Thanks for making a statement.

One problem with the article is that it has been dominated by editors that have a clear or likely COI. Please take care as you are walking in their footsteps. --Hipal (talk) 17:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I encourage you to focus on content and factual accuracy rather than making assumptions about other editors' motivations. If there are specific concerns about my edits, please discuss them based on content and policy. 5dondons (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Please don't misrepresent me. I've not made any assumptions about your motivations. --Hipal (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I appreciate the clarification and apologize if I misinterpreted your initial comments. My primary aim is to ensure the accuracy and neutrality of the article, aligning with Wikipedia's guidelines. Let’s focus our efforts on evaluating the content critically and constructively. 5dondons (talk) 17:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Other refs

Can you please explain where you came up with the links you used in the BLPN request? My guess would be an old version of the article. - Hipal (talk) 23:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying to find where those came from. I've copied and pasted too many links doing research on this and must have initially included broken links. 5dondons (talk) 00:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 02:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. [1] --Hipal (talk) 02:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

More specific question concerning conflict of interest

Hi, 5dondons. Reading the "A lengthy welcome" section above, I notice that your statement "My contributions are not driven by any personal or promotional agenda" isn't an actual denial of conflict of interest, merely a denial of being driven by an agenda. As the conflict of interest guideline says, "Someone having a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith". Could you please say whether or not you have any relationship with Ed Young, such as being a family member, a friend, an employee, or having any other external relationship? Bishonen | tålk 02:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC).

Bishonen, thank you for your diligence. It seems there might be some confusion: one typically responds to accusations, not to unasked questions. I don't believe Hipal was accusing me of having a conflict of interest, thus there was nothing to deny WP:AGF. To be perfectly clear now, I have no personal, professional, or financial relationships with Ed Young or any connected entities. My contributions are guided strictly by the principles of neutrality and verifiability that define Wikipedia. --5dondons 5dondons (talk) 04:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Bishonen | tålk 14:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC).

Blocked as an undisclosed paid editor

I see that the typical bad faith accusations against our editors of having a "personal vendetta" and "stalking" have started. Per your own statement in the same diff that you uploaded the photo of Craig Groeschel, User:FellowshipPhotography is your WP:sockpuppet. This account has been indefinitely blocked as an undisclosed paid editor, along with the FellowshipPhotography account. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 02:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC).