User talk:Accurate checker

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, at Accurate checker, has made edits that do not conform to our policies and guidelines and therefore have been reverted. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you did not do this, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors. If you'd like to experiment with the syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

You don't have to log in to read or edit pages on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free, requires no personal information, and has many benefits. Without a username, your IP address is used to identify you.

Some good links for newcomers are:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask the Help Desk, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Again, welcome! OnlyNano^talk 01:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to John Curtis (Utah politician). Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. OnlyNano^talk 01:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that your addition was violating the neutral point of view, such claims have been rejected by the candidate himself and takes the article away from the main point. I strongly disagree with your edit. I admit to not being a fan of John Curtis from the left but this actually seemed overly preferential. Accurate checker (talk) 01:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New message to Accurate checker

Hey there. Can you please explain why you are removing information from John Curtis (Utah politician? I believe you might have a conflict of interest. Just because something in his article doesn't reflect his views (such as opposition of him), doesn't mean it should be removed.