User talk:Joker1Joker

Welcome!

Hi Joker1Joker! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, Joker1Joker, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Gevaarlik (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this information. We are friends but have not coordinated. We spoke about the demagogue-like page of Iqbal Survé and thought it was misleading hence we made these edits, not on coordination as we did not discuss the edits we made but only that the Wikipedia page was written as PR and not a neutral POV as mentioned in the Talk page by @Zaian Gevaarlik (talk) 09:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree These 2 accounts are clearly running a coordinated attack against the Sekunjalo group. In the past ~3 weeks they have made over 110 edits to pages linked to the Sekunjalo group. Namely: Iqbal Survé, African News Agency, Independent Online, The Sunday Independent and Sekunjalo Investments. All the articles have been edited with an extremely negative bias which is in no way neutral. JayFacts (talk) 17:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not true. My edits share both sides of the story. I cannot help if the truth is that Survé has participated in dodgy delas. The pages had a vast amount of PR content promoting Survé and so as to neutralise that, controversy topics were added. My interest is in South African media hence I have made edits in this regard. @JayFacts, on the other hand, uses rhetoric that is very similar to that used in Survé newspapers and from Survé himself such as "coordinated attack". If you have a conflict of interest, or if you are Survé himself, or a friend or family member, please declare it. Gevaarlik (talk) 20:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear to see that you have a negative bias towards these pages you've been editing. Please take this as notice that I will be reporting both your accounts for review as per the Wikipedia guidelines as a single purpose account. As @ToBeFree reported "your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia".

Furthermore, the purpose of Wikipedia is not to "neutralise" content as you've stated but present the facts. You seem to have the idea that positive content needs to be offset with negative content. Unfortunately that is not how it works. JayFacts (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made it clear that my edits are impartial with Survé's reactions included. I am not offsetting positive content with negative content but I have added sections allow for a neutral POV, as topics such as International activities and Recognition are clearly promoting Survé, sanctifying him and creating a false impression that he is without controversies. Gevaarlik (talk) 20:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gevaarlik and JayFacts.

Gevaarlik, you may like to add {{subst:uw-coi}} in a new section below if you are concerned about a conflict of interest, but please avoid speculation beyond that. We should focus on the article itself and its content, which should be kept neutral independently of who wrote it. Discussing on the article's talk page about specific neutrality issues is more likely to lead to good changes. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree Thank you for your advice in that regard. I appreciate it and will take note.

Similarly there appears to be conflict of interest on a related page Sekunjalo Investments with q removal of a large amount of content and sources and an addition of promotional content. Gevaarlik (talk) 20:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is all very strange. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 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.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]