since you decided to delete talk above and post a statement that there weren't any links to the above then here are some links per your deletion comment as well as further proof of double standards and bias etc some of blackpearl uses various alias wikipedia names self published quotes from through august i am pirate lord ess of the caribbean sea along with my mate jack sparrow i am the first pirates of the caribbean fan in the universe i manage and contribute to my obsession pirates of the caribbean lists many pirates of the caribbean articles in wikipedia i am working my way into managing all pirates of the caribbean articles in the future that i can i am the biggest pirates of the caribbean fan of all time i have proof of it as well i m writing a book i m also a pirates of the caribbean consultant if you have any questions i own bring me that horizon forum i am a big fan of johnny depp i am a big fan of pirates of the caribbean movies i have a pirates of the caribbean obsession page i d advise you to keep your hat on and not vandalize the pages or you won t be happy seriously i am principal contributor of pirates of the caribbean articles my knowledge on pirates spans from my favorite films pirates of the caribbean hence i am a pirates of the caribbean consultant my harry potter obsession pages whoville deletes any critical fact or information stating that it doesn t meet his requirements yet whoville doesn t delete other critical facts or information using the same standards instead those are allowed see wikipedia com the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit wikipedia is an encyclopedia written collaboratively by many of its readers the term collaborative writing refers to projects where written works are created by multiple people together collaboratively rather than individually some projects are overseen by an editor or editorial team but many grow without any of this top down oversight volunteers do not need any formal training before creating a new article or editing an existing article the people who create and edit articles in wikipedia come from countries all around the world and have a wide range of ages and backgrounds neutral point of view is a fundamental wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of wikipedia all wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view npov representing fairly and as far as possible without bias all significant views that have been published by reliable sources this is non negotiable and expected of all articles and of all article editors for guidance on how to make an article conform to the neutral point of view see the npov tutorial for examples and explanations that illustrate key aspects of this policy see wikipedia neutral point of view faq bias npov requires views to be represented without bias all editors and all sources have biases what matters is how we combine them to create a neutral article one can think of unbiased writing as the fair analytical description of all relevant sides of a debate including the mutual perspectives and the published evidence when editorial bias toward one particular point of view can be detected the article needs to be fixed neutrality disputes and handling a common type of dispute is when an editor asserts that a fact is both verifiable and cited and should therefore be included in these types of disputes it is important to note that verifiability lives alongside neutrality it does not override it a matter that is both verifiable and supported by reliable sources might nonetheless be proposed to make a point or cited selectively painted by words more favorably or negatively than is appropriate made to look more important or more dubious than a neutral view would present marginalized or given undue standing described in slanted terms which favor or weaken it or subject to other factors suggestive of bias verifiability is only one content criterion neutral point of view is a core policy of wikipedia mandatory non negotiable and to be followed in all articles concerns related to undue weight non neutral fact selection and wording and advancing a personal view are not addressed even slightly by asserting that the matter is verifiable and cited the two are different questions and both must be considered in full in deciding how the matter should be presented in an artic