LizzieTruth

Welcome

Hello LizzieTruth, welcome to Wikipedia. I reverted your edit to ONPASSIVE for a few reasons:

1. We generally do not allow external links to be placed in the main text of articles. A small number of links to relevant external websites are generally permitted at the bottom of the page in a separate "external links" section; you can see our guideline on external links for more information.
2. Your edit also gave the impression that your edit was intended to drive traffic to an external website offering a paid service, rather than to contribute encyclopedic information. Wikipedia does not permit advertising.
3. Wikipedia is meant to be a source of information with a neutral point of view, which generally means that we write about all significant viewpoints on a topic, balanced according to views expressed in reliable sources. Sensationalism, "exposing the truth", and what we call righting great wrongs, are generally not compatible with Wikipedia's purpose. You can click on the links here for more general information on these topics.

A different version of the information you added had already been in the article for a while, but an editor with a conflict of interest removed it. That has been going on for a while, and when I saw your first edit I realized it was happening again, and I restored the article to the version before they removed it. I felt that the existing version presented the information more neutrally than your version, for the reasons above, and when you added it back again it was duplicated. See the last paragraph in the "history" section. If you have more updated information you could add it to that section, but keep in mind that anything you add should be cited to a reliable source (preferably not a court document, they are considered a primary source) and presented neutrally, otherwise I or another editor may edit your addition or remove it completely. Thanks. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ivanvector

Thank you for your comments, instruction and clarification. As you can see I’m a complete newbie to editing on Wikipedia.

Please let me assure you that my intention was not to drive traffic to a site offering a paid service and presume you are alluding to the para mentioning some case files being available for free to the general public with fees attached for others. Having re-read this I completely understand your standpoint. The link provided offered the reader an opportunity to access free documents only but as my edit mentioned the availability of documents for a fee, money changing hands was indeed implied.

Once again thanks for your patience and also for reverting to a previous version of the webpage which presents the facts in a clear manner.

Should I consider editing any pages in future I’ll refer to your guidance. In the meantime, if I notice the removal of paras relating to the SEC would it be OK to drop you a quick line?

Regards

LizzieTruth LizzieTruth (talk) 21:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)