User:Ariyen

I am here to help edit and fix things right.
I don't believe in advertising personal things as this is an encyclopedia.
It should have links to help support what it shows.
I feel the need to help show the accurate links.
You can check them out yourself.
Have a great day!

Please leave a kind message on my User Talk page.


It's sad that people want to get upset because I revert the on opinion posts that are being reposted from actual tabloids not supported by Wikipedia.

Claiming reputable but not looking at the list of the sections where the parts being used aren't reputable.

Sad that these people try to play innocent without looking into facts. Reporting on Alligations, much of the others had facts (Court) against them . Proven that they were alligations and not some game.

I am appalled at the person trying to attack me for this. It shows bias of not actually seeing what all is going on. The one in question is skillful, but is playing dirty. She's honestly shown edited conversations. A fake signature that's been stolen off the Internet. I did see it besides the one here. It's not fitting to the style of the person. She's used a model as her own image and a user on Instagram called her out on it. That user had removed the information from her page, because of the one in question that's causing the alligations... She had threatened the Instagram user indirectly with a case and decist. Thankfully learning that one still has all her information saved to contact the lawyer with.

I am appalled at the situation. The one in question going to the socials, feels "attacked" . Despite her outting him on other people's Instagram pages and shows Instagram pages , etc. Then she started calling and contacting the media. Them posting half truths (They have to sell their information). From his side as well. I have sources that's not online to know this is pure smearing and not legit information. Legit Information is actual unedited photos that fit the timing as well as unedited conversations, unedited and proven documents on both sides. Etc. None of those have been presented. So, you have to do court to confirm or deny if it's really proven alligations as this was also done with the ex and court as those are the articles shown only. None biased.

Her going to the media is influencing biased news and information causing the lawyer to respond back with media and using tmz (The main actual source of all of this) is a poor choice. None of this will look good in court, but all remains to be seen are facts.

Personally, for a wiki wanting to do documentation on people... I believe using articles with court involvement is better than nothing and nothing is better than giving a side a voice. There would be NO biased reporting or information used. That should be the limit on a person against them. Show the legal and proven good and bad of their career, etc.

Me in bad faith? Nah, I am more open minded and people hate that. They want to run with what Information they get and see. Everything that I included in on his page? I checked multiple sources and used what was allowed here.

Especially the music.

I'm tired of being attacked, because I believe in accuracy and honesty. Not false information that's clearly biased..

Non bias (court, etc.) gives a pure picture of someone. 

Thanks - Ariyen

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.