User talk:Matthias197

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Matthias197, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am your mentor and you can ask me any questions on my talk page or check out our help pages if you need help. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Play the The Wikipedia Adventure
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
Remember to cite reliable sources
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Again, welcome! ¹⁴¹ Pr {contribs} 08:24, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Your recent editing history at Talk:Vaush shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —C.Fred (talk) 01:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to work on a consensus. Look up the history of my contributions to the Talk:Vaush page. I added more and more sources and am still looking for more. I won't allow this issue to be swiped under the rug.

In my society we don't protect people that support child pornography, thus child abuse. Matthias197 (talk) 02:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As has been noted, the issue is the absence of reliable sources. BLP policy does not play favorites; it does not apply only to living people we like. Without reliable sources—and for material of this nature, the sources need to be independent—it can't go in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 02:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But you know that mainstream media keeps quiet on issues like these, because it does not fit the narrative. You are all rejecting a potentially good source without knowing the context. I bet you haven't even opened it nor read it.

This is how you all operate. Silencing your own kind of people.

These sources are not fiction, they are just referencing and relating to long video live streams posted by Vaush himself. Matthias197 (talk) 02:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So mainstream media is not part of (your) society then. Your on the wrong website, since following mainstream media is one of the things WP is for. When you have WP:BLP-good sources, something may be done. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]