Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:54, 22 September 2008

September 2008

You seem to be edit warring across the encyclopedia on Saul Alinsky-related topics, which seems to be the sole purpose of this account on Misplaced Pages. In particular, you have added and reverted the poorly sourced a number of times that The Obama Nation covers the POV claim (popular now among the conservative blogosphere) of Barack Obama's indirect ties to Alinsky. Please note the general community probation on articles relating to Barack Obama (notice to follow), and desist from edit warring on Obama-related articles. If you do not you may be temporarily blocked from editing the encyclopedia to avoid disruption. Wikidemon (talk) 22:46, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, The Obama Nation, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you.

I did not think my adding of a line in the book contents section dealing with the book's covering that Obama was a community organizer in South Chicago and how Obama got the job by being hired by an Alinsky disciple, Gerald Kellman, was out of line and I did not think it was poorly sourced and thus you should not have removed it in the first place, thus starting what you are now calling edit warring on my part. Some of the anti-Obama Nation comments in other parts of the article are far worse and weaker sourced. Thus I put it back not knowing I would be accused of starting warring. Then you took it out again. And I put it back and I found stronger sources as to the books content which is asserting links to the Alinsky schools of South Chicago right within the book itself which I posted. Since the book is about Obama, I thought it was totally fair to add the line into the content paragraph of the article. I did not spew any far right venom. This book like all books deserve a fair hearing. However, as the article is now, I personally think this article about the book Obama Nation is totally biased against the book and smears Dr. Corsi. It seems that moderate or conservative comments about the book are not welcome in this article. And the probation issue is being used to silence any moderate or conservative input. The article is about a book about Obama. Assertions to major points made in the book by Dr. Corsi should be displayed. Links between Alinsky school and organizser and Obama are extensively covered in Corsi's book. As should be the Obama responses be covered, which are there in droves and have been left there linked to in full.

As to you giving me a formal warning for edit warring, I am new to all this and I am disappointed that you have elected to put me on the warning list. I think you started it not I. My initial post was an accurate portrayal of what is reported in the book's content. I personally feel you did the repeated delete and then the edit warring warning that to intimidate me. Yes I do have a major interest in Alinsky. But, I think my postings in Misplaced Pages about Alinsky have been very fair and objective and I have greatly improved the article on this great contributor to the field of organizing and the pioneer of community organizing. I think Alinsky would be proud of what Obama has achieved. I think you have unfairly pounced on me about my work on Alinsky and my pointing out in the Content section of this article, that the book Obama Nation discusses extensively links between Obama and the Alinsky school and Alinsky trained organizers of South Chicago. I simply added a short line paraphrasing that into the 'content paragraph' of the article from the book that Dr. Corsi discusses in depth the affiliation by Obama with Alinsky schools and methods in South Chicago and how Obama got his job there as a community organizer. I ask that you remove me from the warning list as I think I was unfairly put there. Thank you. This is my first try at the signing icon. I hope I am doing that correctly too. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make a case for including it the article talk page is the best place. Per the terms of article probation, which more or less follow WP:BRD, if a proposed addition of material is disputed you should leave it out while you seek consensus on the article talk page rather than edit warring to try to get it into the article. We are all on notice that the article is on probation and you will see that most repeat editors of the article are on the list. The templated message simply confirms that you know. Wikidemon (talk) 08:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You did more than just let me know. You said my addition of a sentence about another major piece of Content in Dr. Corsi's book was poorly source. The source was an article in the Washington Post. Many other anti-book, anti-Corsi source references in this article are to newspaper articles such as the New York Times and the Boston Globe. You have not removed any of those as poorly sourced. This article is basically devoid of any positive newspaper reviews and article about this book. It is filled with references and links to hit pieces on the book and Dr. Corsi. The article is very unbalanced as it is now. By putting it on "probation" you have effectively frozen the piece as a totally anti-"The Obama Nation" book and allow a smear of Dr. Corsi to be perpetuated. This article needs balance added of positive reviews of the book. And what you have done is put me and probably others on the warning list for attempting to do so, in my case for simply adding a line about a major content subject of the book. You did not just tell me about the probation (protection of the article in its current state, imo) but you also slapped me on the warning list and threaten to ban me from posting on Misplaced Pages. Again, I believe that was meant to intimidate me. This article is dramatically biased against the book as it stands now and is not a fair discussion of the pro reviews of the book. It just has the cons. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 18:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you SineBot. I just tried the signing icon and it worked. Here goes again. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 07:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Opinions and sources

Material sourced to postings on 3rd party personal websites is not suitable for an evaluation of an authors work, in either an article about the work, or about the author. Especially not the author--re Robert Greene. See WP:RS and WP:BLP. Please do not reinsert it. DGG (talk) 21:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)