User:Tinaagapiou
Warning: Your Edits are Disruptive and do not Follow Wikipedia Guidelines
[edit]Hello, I'm user:Tco03displays. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions on the ELAM_(Cyprus) Wikipedia entry have been undone because they did not appear constructive. Specifically, they appear to violate Wikipedia's editing policy, as well as Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. This refers particularly in relation to multiple edits of November 2020, in which subjective characterizations are used throughout the article, including unnecessary and extensive propaganda material from the party, for example long quotes and its detailed manifesto. Furthermore, there appears to be a lack of careful editing, with multiple spelling mistakes. Additionally, you appear to have consciously mass cited your own self-published article from academia.edu throughout the entry. On closer inspection, it is evident that you have simply copied and pasted whole bulky sections of your own article at various sections of the Wikipedia entry as well, a practise which does not follow Wikipedia guidelines and may fall under Wikipedia:Spam. Be aware please that a self-published work is not considered as a reliable source on Wikipedia and should thus not be used. For more information please read Self-published sources.
Furthermore, in multiple edits you have massively deleted whole unfavourable sections to the party which were backed by detailed references, particularly the sections on violence, connections to the Golden Dawn party, the mafia and the draft dodge, offering no explanation in your edit other than that the information was "false" and that "The documement were untrue and unjustified scientifically. My academical background and expertise as a researcher, allows me to be able to justify the truth". Please be aware that academic credentials are not a justifiable reason to remove any content, and that edits on Wikipedia must follow the specific guidelines for editing, including Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view. As is indicated in Wikipedia:Expert editors, 'what matters in Wikipedia is what you do, not who you are. Previously published reliable sources, not Wikipedia editors, have authority for the content of this encyclopedia'. Please be informed that such mass removal of referenced text go against Wikipedia's editing policies and should be avoided. In addition, since you are a member of the party, as indicated here https://www.philenews.com/eidiseis/politiki/article/546908/stelechos-tis-allilengyis-paraitithike-kai-pig-sto-elam, please be aware that such removal could be interpreted as advocacy. An article can report objectively as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view, the removal of referenced content based on claims of authority is a direct breaking to that principle. It should also be pointed out that as a member of the party, you might be in a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest in relation to this article. You can be informed in detail of these policies by reading Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines#Content_changes, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Advocacy, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia:Five pillars. Please use the talk page of the article in the future before making such radical changes.
Given the extend of these edits, I have had to manually revert the article, which complicates the editing efforts of other editors. Please be aware that further and continuous breaking of guidelines will result in a report.
Tco03displays (talk) 20:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)