The resurrection accounts given in the four Gospels are commonly attacked as being contradictory. The claims are organized by headings - each of which are where an alleged contradiction occurs:
Which women came to the tomb?
None of these claims are mutually exclusive. They never say that only so-and-so went. If it did, that would be a genuine contradiction, but it doesn't.
For example, if Mike goes to the basketball game with Scott, would it be a lie if I said that Scott went? What if I only mention Mike going? Of course not.
Omitting someone's name is not the same as stating that they didn't go. None of the authors are obliged to mention every last person that went.
Was the sun up or was it down when the women came to the tomb?
They arrived at dawn, which is the transition between night and day. Therefore, you could say it was "yet dark", even though "it began to dawn", i.e. the sun began to rise, even though night had not totally passed yet.
The confusion arises from the Matthew account:
Matthew 28:1-5
1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
Verses 2-4 recount when the stone was rolled away. It's an aside, with verse 5 continuing directly from verse 1. The 3 verses between are an interjection of backstory that Matthew saw fit to include to explain who rolled away the stone.
So how do we know that the women didn't see the events in verses 2-4? Because the other accounts imply that they didn't. It's simply an explanatory aside. As mentioned in other articles, Matthew is the least "strict" of all four writers when it comes to recounting events in chronological order, often preferring to arrange things topically. Read a Harmony of the Gospels to see many such examples.
Note that Matthew 28:2 says that the angel was seated on a stone, but as mentioned before, this took place before the women arrived.
John refers to the second visit to the tomb (John 20:2 is the first visit).
In regard to Mark and Luke, either:
In regard to the denotation of "angels" as opposed to "men", the "men" in Mark and Luke are obviously meant to be understood to be angels by their apparel (Mark 16:5, Luke 24:4). Angels occasionally appear in the form of men (Daniel 9:21, Genesis 19:1-2, Hebrews 13:2).
As for some accounts saying that they spoke to one rather than two, obviously, if you spoke to two, then it's also true that you spoke to one. The two claims aren't mutually exclusive. None stated that they only ever spoke to one. We just get details from some accounts that others don't record and vice versa.
The confusion arises because the account in Mark says:
Mark 16:8
8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
However, this is only referring to what the women initially did, as we can tell from the other accounts that eventually they told the others.
There are plausible ways to reconcile all of the accounts. The reason that we have four Gospels is to give us a more complete view of the events that took place without having to rely on a single witness.
All of the accounts are correct, and none of them contradict one another.