| Revision as of 16:41, 15 June 2007 editSpartan-James (talk | contribs)Rollbackers5,226 edits Caution: Vandalism on User talk:Esmehwp. using TW← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:42, 15 June 2007 edit undoEsmehwp (talk | contribs)406 edits ←Replaced page with 'Hello'Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Hello | Hello | ||
| == Mediation == | |||
| Regarding our dispute, would you accept mediation, such as ]? ] 16:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Ok i'll bite... look we don't really need mediation all I'm asking you is to not delete other people's work I have tried not to delete your work if i could help it and if you go back to all the articles and restore your own additions without deleting or changing things you believe are untrue and unsourced I will defend your contributions as well. the way i see it lack of sources is no excuse for deleting anything. just add.] 16:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Well, in Misplaced Pages anything that does not have a source can be removed anytime. Otherwise anyone can write anything without proof and it could never be removed. See ].] 16:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| you think I don't know WP policies? don't do that again. read my writing. if you cant understand what I'm saying to you then there's no point in talking. LAST WORD: delete and you'll be reverted. FULL STOP ] 16:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Note that if you continue to refuse to explain your editing and do not make any attempt to solve this by discussion, I will take this to the arbitration committee which can stop this sort of disruption. For example by blocking you from editing. But preferable we can avoid this by discussion instead. What do you prefer? ] 16:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Just to clarify before I proceed futher with ]. Do you accept ]? I will interpret no answer as a no.] 17:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Why not just find a compromise? How about if Ultramarine, instead of deleting things he thinks lack proper referencing, he instead sticks a Fact/Cite tage, and lets it stand for a week or so, enough time for editors to properly source the material and provide proper attribution--or else discuss on talk about the merits of the issue, one way or another--BEFORE simply deleting large amounts of information? That is what I've asked him to do, and I think it would avoid these conflicts. Its the reason why we have this option and its a reasonable compromise.] 18:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Esmehwp has stated here and on other pages that he will not accept any removal which is of course unacceptable. But your suggestion is fine. I have already added disputed templates to pages in question and talk pages notices describing the disputes. Or will now add them. My edits were explained in detail in the edit summaries. I will wait a few days to see if references or arguments appear. Otherwise I will restore the corrected versions.] 19:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I will restore deleted information if I feel the deletion is POV or if it detracts from the article. ultramarine thinks USA is the best country in the world and that is his dogma there is nothing anyone can do about it. it is not based on reason logic or facts its an emotional thing he is an ideological fanatic the only way to stop him biasing WP into his own dogma, is to stand up to him you cant compromise with fanatics I'm not going to run around finding sources for everything he disputes, he can add what he likes he can put up tags if he wants but he cant go around deleting things i''m going to stop him.] 23:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| PS No Ultramarine I don't share your dogma so there's no point in mediation. | |||
| :You as all other editors must follow Misplaced Pages policy. So if necessary I will take to place that can impose sanctions. But I will give you or other editors a few days to add sources. Also see ], discuss the factual arguments, do not attack the person.] 05:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Since there is a lot, I say more than a few days. Check back in 30 days and see how much as been cited. You would be justified in removing stuff that was not cited by then. Lets not rush but do things right. I also recomment you help look for sources that support the claims, which will go a long way to showing good faith, intead of giving the appearnce of only looking to remove things as a means of POV pushing. I also hope that others give you the benefit of the doubt and assume good faith. Even if we don't agree, we should abide by the spirit and policies of WP to build an encylopedia for everyone, with all POV treated adequantly and fairly. Hopefully, I'm not being too utopian in this desire.] 09:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::No such requirement. From ] "Unsourced or poorly sourced edits may be challenged and removed at any time." and "the responsibility for finding a source lies with the person who adds or restores the material." I could remove the material anytime, so waiting a few days is more than required. Assume good faith yourself and do not accuse me of POV pushing. Regarding an encyclopdia, it should obviously not contain false or biased information.] 09:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::We are not talking about requirements, we are talking about being contructive and working with others, showing good faith, and seeking compromises to move forward. I did not accuse you of POV pushing. I gave suggestions for you to take that would show the opposite and promote good faith in you for others to see. I agree we should not allow obviously false or biased information, but if others disagree with you, maybe it is not so obvious as you seem to think. As I said, putting up a cite/Fact tag is a good compromise, and hopefully you will assit in looking for sources that support the claims, instead of just trying to delete everything that happens to align with your own personal POV. This method of editing, I think, is what is generated the over the top reaction against you amont other editors, hence my suggestion to reverse this, and all work together on a common goal. This means compromise. I think my suggestions should work for you, and your opponents. Edit waring won't get anyone anywhere.] 10:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Read my last response again. To quote Jimmy Wales, founder of Misplaced Pages: "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced."<ref>{{cite web|title="Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information"|publisher=WikiEN-l ] archive|author=Jimmy Wales|date=2006-05-16|accessdate=2006-06-11|url=http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-May/046440.html}}</ref> ] 10:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I agree with that, but this is not in the category of "random speculative I heard it somewhere," nor "pseudeo information." Its information that is supported by a number of editors, and I don't even know if your claim about it not being properly sourced is fully acurate, either. Since you are opposed, the best you can do is cite it, then make mention of it on talk, and wait and see. Edit waring if you fail to do this is also bad, and against policies. So, this is a good compromise.] 10:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::The personal opinions of anonymous Misplaced Pages editors are not reliable sources. As stated before, if continuing to revert in order to insert unsourced claims without explanation and even refusing to discuss this on the talk pages, I will follow the Misplaced Pages dispute resolution process with all those involved, even if it requires a RfA.] 11:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == June 2007 == | |||
| {{{icon|] }}}Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Misplaced Pages, as you did to ]. Your edits appear to be ] and have been ]. If you would like to experiment, please use the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> ''please don't blank your talk page'' ] 16:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:42, 15 June 2007
Hello