Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:16, 23 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)

So noted. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 22:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Obama article probation

You persist desipte repeated requests that you desist from making personal attacks (WP:NPA), unfounded accusations (WP:CIVIL), and assumptions of bad faith (WP:AGF), particularly in articles covered by the Barack Obama article probation (see above notice). I have closed the discussion in question. Editors have suggested that you review Misplaced Pages's policies on content and behavior. Please do not further edit Misplaced Pages in a disruptive way. Wikidemon (talk) 23:17, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I deny all your charges as trumped up exaggerations. And you yourself made an assumption of bad faith (WP:AGF) towards me in your very first message to me in this when you deleted my addition of one factual sentence to the article, and all threads about the simple attempt to add one sentence to the CONTENT section of the article about the book. That was hardly good faith and a welcome to me as a new editor to the Obama Nation book article. You are not neutral and objective in this. You are engaging in transference or engaging in tactics to discredit me. A classic Alinsky tactic. Oh well, alls well that ends well. As Alinsky said, the ends justify the means. Enjoy your means. And please stop the threats towards me. (WP:NPA) Have a good day. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to The Obama Nation, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Misplaced Pages:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --GoodDamon 23:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you too. And so noted. See these links. (WP:AGF) --Mtngoat63 (talk) 23:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Civility and edit warring

You continue to make accusations, personal attacks, edit war, etc. This edit was not in good faith you are basically declaring that you have a personal battle with other editors. Stop now or an administrator reviewing the matter may block your account from further editing the encyclopedia. Wikidemon (talk) 00:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

stop now - this edit is edit warring poorly sourced information into the encyclopedia, and the accusaitons of edit warring and vandalism are a personal attack. Please desist.

Seriously, read WP:RS and WP:V now. You are risking being blocked from editing with your continuous and persistent attempts to introduce poorly-sourced material to Misplaced Pages. It honestly doesn't matter what you or I think of the sources you are using; they violate Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. --GoodDamon 01:52, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

AN/I report

This is a courtesy notice. I have reported your recent edits here. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 01:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Saul Alinsky, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. This has officially become vandalism. You are seriously trying to argue that a blogspot page is a reliable source, and have refused to read any of the official Misplaced Pages policies and procedures associated with content. --GoodDamon 02:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

You have also violated WP:3RR - I am filing a report presently. You should probably self-revert your latest changes, although I cannot promise you at this point that this would avoid your being blocked. Wikidemon (talk) 02:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Saul Alinsky. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --GoodDamon 02:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Saul Alinsky. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Again, deliberate introduction of poor sources such as blogspot -- and this should go without saying -- qualifies as vandalism. You get 1 more warning --GoodDamon 02:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)