Hiddekel

Wikipedia is not an advocacy site. There is one, it's Wikinfo, and nobody goes there because positive POV makes articles into jokes. The rules are what they are, and people who think that they shouldn't apply because their issue is Really, Really Important, really, really bug me.

Wikipedia is not a place to set right the truth on your favourite topic. It isn't here for truth at all. It's here to be a reliable source for verifiable reference information on as many topics as possible. Information should be presented from a neutral point of view. I like these concepts, and, yeah, I'll fight for them.

Aside from that, I am generally more interested in helping achieve consensus than engaging in edit wars. I recognize that my opinions can be off-track at times, and I have an aversion to reverting the edits of people who genuinely believe that their edits do not violate one of the Five Pillars or related policies and guidelines, even if I disagree. I can be expected to assume good faith until being given good reason to believe otherwise. I only ask the same from my fellow editors.