User talk:Leke23

June 2023

Hello, I'm LilianaUwU. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Simon Ekpa seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 04:42, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Liliana, may i know you are deleting my edit even with citation? Leke23 (talk) 04:48, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

All information about notable individuals should be based on fact, i have been following his activities. Is there any reason his recent Ambassador for peace award shouldnt be on his Wikipedia Leke23 (talk) 04:51, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Could you help in citing it correctly instead of deleting the edit? Leke23 (talk) 04:57, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

You'd need reliable sources first, especially when it comes to such a controversial figure. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 06:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Liliana, here is a reliable source from Finnish Broadcasting cooperation Simon Ekpa received Ambassador for Peace award at the African day event in Helsinki Leke23 (talk) 19:09, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Simon Ekpa. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 12:19, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLP applies even to politicians you like or don't like. Read it and follow it, or an admin may block you. And if WP:COI applies to you, follow that too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Please stop. 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 Simon Ekpa, you may be blocked from editing.
You are falsely representing sources to push a viewpoint, as shown here (where the source says nothing about "control") and here (where the source says nothing about the level of "compliance"). Carry on in this vein, and you will end up being blocked indefinitely. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 14:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC) SuperMarioMan (Talk) 14:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign primary endorsements. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
By my count you have reverted your preferred version back into the article more than 10 times in fewer days. If you do it again, I will be reporting your continued disruptive editing to our admin noticeboards. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 18:02, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Why would you delete Simon Ekpa from the list? That is not neutral

You should check the government in exile and the legitimacy to those who believe in them. If the creator of Donald Trump list added a Prime Minister of a government in Exile, it means they recognise the influence of such government and you have your opinion but not to delete a Prime Minister by citing that the Biafra is not a sovereign state. Don’t you have knowledge of what government in Exile mean? Leke23 (talk) 15:16, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

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 standard message is designed as an 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.

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics, one more

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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.

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)