User talk:Darkalw35!
October 2022
[edit]
Hello, I'm DeQuavious Bingleton. I noticed that you recently removed content from Joseph Kallarangatt without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DeQuavious Bingleton Fly On✈(talk) 21:24, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Joseph Kallarangatt. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Also, if you have any connection to Kallarangatt or his church, you must declare it. —C.Fred (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Joseph Kallarangatt, you may be blocked from editing. —C.Fred (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- I do not understand on what basis you are accusing me of adding commentary and my personal analysis. I have removed only a section of the paragraph which is opinionated and is not supported by evidence and is making serious allegations against Joseph Kallarangatt, who is a prominent figure in the state of Kerala. Have you verified the sources that are making allegations against Joseph Kallarangatt of promoting conspiracy theories. On what basis are you referring to "narcotics jihad" and "love jihad" as conspiracy theories. They are terms that have not yet been defined and you allowing the person who wrote the paragraph to make unfounded allegations against Joseph Kallarangatt. Darkalw35! (talk) 20:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- The prose section further on in the article goes into sufficient detail that his claims can be viewed as conspiracy theories. —C.Fred (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Those are statements with no credible proof. The supporting documents given in the reference sections are editorials from newspapers which do not consist neutral pieces of evidence. On what basis are you claiming that the statements that he made are conspiracy theories and that he has made these allegations to cover up controversies? You are making allegations against a prominent figure in the state of Kerala based on the opinions written in some editorials of online newspapers. By allowing these opinions to be published you are making unfounded allegations against Mr Kallarangatt. This is not a neutral point of view and have been written with ulterior motives to malign the image of Mr Kallarangatt. I would like to kindly request you to remove these allegations against Mr Kallarangatt and to re-verify the sources before considering republishing them.
- Thank you. Darkalw35! (talk) 20:49, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- They are news stories, not editorials. —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- All these so called news stories are one-sided opinions of the writers. There are plenty of other news stories that will contradict the ones that have been used to support these statements. How can you expect a news article by online news platforms to be reliable neutral sources of information? How can you verify the reliability of these online newspapers? I can find twice as many articles that contradict the opinion stated in these news articles. Please verify the reliability of the evidences used before publishing them as facts. This is not acceptable that you are using articles written in digital news platforms as reliable evidence when making allegations against a prominent figure in society. Please can you study the allegations made and verify the sources before publishing them. It also making big allegations against the ruling party in India by stating that Mr Kallarangatt has made these statements that "He has also been accused of using the love and narcotics jihad controversy as a distraction from the sexual assault and corruption allegations surrounding the church and to forge an alliance with the Hindutva movement in India, in an effort to prevent corruption investigations from agencies under the Narendra Modi government". The above statement has no interest but to tarnish Mr Kallarangatt's image before the public. They are loaded statements that suggest Mr Kallarangatt has been spreading conspiracy theories (with no proof that they are conspiracy theories apart from the opinions of online news platforms) as well as stating that he has made these statements to appease the ruling party in India to cover up corruption charges. They are great and dangerous allegations with very little proof aimed at tarnishing the individuals image as well as of that of the ruling party in India. Darkalw35! (talk) 23:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- I do not see any problem with the sources, per WP:RS. As for the allegations, they've been properly attributed, so they are also fairly included.As for tarnishing Kallarangatt's image, I've seen little evidence of intentional editing to do that, but plenty of evidence of editing by church employees and others with conflicts of interest to boost his image. —C.Fred (talk) 23:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- All these so called news stories are one-sided opinions of the writers. There are plenty of other news stories that will contradict the ones that have been used to support these statements. How can you expect a news article by online news platforms to be reliable neutral sources of information? How can you verify the reliability of these online newspapers? I can find twice as many articles that contradict the opinion stated in these news articles. Please verify the reliability of the evidences used before publishing them as facts. This is not acceptable that you are using articles written in digital news platforms as reliable evidence when making allegations against a prominent figure in society. Please can you study the allegations made and verify the sources before publishing them. It also making big allegations against the ruling party in India by stating that Mr Kallarangatt has made these statements that "He has also been accused of using the love and narcotics jihad controversy as a distraction from the sexual assault and corruption allegations surrounding the church and to forge an alliance with the Hindutva movement in India, in an effort to prevent corruption investigations from agencies under the Narendra Modi government". The above statement has no interest but to tarnish Mr Kallarangatt's image before the public. They are loaded statements that suggest Mr Kallarangatt has been spreading conspiracy theories (with no proof that they are conspiracy theories apart from the opinions of online news platforms) as well as stating that he has made these statements to appease the ruling party in India to cover up corruption charges. They are great and dangerous allegations with very little proof aimed at tarnishing the individuals image as well as of that of the ruling party in India. Darkalw35! (talk) 23:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- They are news stories, not editorials. —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- The prose section further on in the article goes into sufficient detail that his claims can be viewed as conspiracy theories. —C.Fred (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
@C.Fred: A quick review of Mathew Thomas's contributions suggests an obvious SPA sockpuppet. Let me know if you would like me to open a formal investigation. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:30, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. DatGuyTalkContribs 17:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)