Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Sorry- you're right, I missed the footnote in the middle because of the speculation at the end which I'm glad you removed. I know the reports came in, but think we should proceed with caution about reporting minute-by-minute breaking news. Plenty of time to add material when it's really verified. But I was wrong when I said it was unsourced. Thanks for catching that. I'll leave it in, as I don't feel that strongly about it, but let's please keep speculation out.Tvoz/talk21:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Alright, then- thanks for disclosing that; the editor in question made at least 4 replies in which he only demanded my backing off because I had previously played the game. TBH, considering the info you'd introduced to that page, I had wondered what your connection was. Incidentally that very website might end up being a good source for corroborating some of the info in the article; it's still mirrored by the Internet Archive. At any rate, thanks for your reply! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 17:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Cool, thanks for keeping an eye on things. As to concern about outing, I'm confident there's sufficient behavioral evidence on-wiki to establish the identity of the editor in question without violating policy- should it become necessary. In any event, it does look like things have died down to the point where we can assume he's either accepting things or preparing a counterstrike. Thanks again! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 01:35, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi.
Hi. Do not remove my comments from talk pages, as you did here and here. I believe you can be blocked for that. And try to be more civil when leaving comments on my talk page (that is, avoid this).
Back to discussing the content, can you please double check that reference you mentioned on the Dwight Lauderdale article? It gives me a 404 error. Also, the sentence saying that Lauderdale "had a passion to "get the story right"" can not be sourced by an interview where a co-worker says he "works hard to see that we get the story right". That just someones opinion, and not a fact.
Likewise, we should avoid press-release language like "After working in news since he was 17, he wanted to have choices and work at his own pace". This is unnecessarily praising.
What, may I ask, were you thinking when you made these reverts? That's hardly trolling. He thinks something is OR. If you don't think so discuss it with him on the talk page. Your reversions were trolling. Misplaced Pages users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users. Unseemly and disruptive conduct such as this is prohibited. Please see incivility--Patton12316:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I came here to leave a similar message. Those edits are not trolling, and continuously calling another a user a troll in incivil, disruptive, and constitutes trolling itself. If you want to stick around you'll have to work together with other users. Discussion on the talk page is the way to resolve disputes, not edit wars and name-calling. BradV16:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Howdy, Kosh. I see you removed the template warning I issued you earlier today citing the essay of not to template the regulars. While this is your talk page and I respect your right to remove whatever you want I would like to point you to a counter essay, Misplaced Pages:Template the regulars. Cheers! Bstone (talk) 20:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
WP:DUCK does not apply, and does not supersede civility. Your motion is not what I templated for, it was your condescending tone and juvenile name-calling that got me here. Try to act in a more appropriate way. — neuro17:43, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, thanks for using my signature as a template for your new one (looks splendid by the way)! Glad to see someone else actually likes it and doesn't think of it as bland... :D — neuro17:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
The quoted passage only quotes someone as saying it, thus it is not an appropriate reference to use for that particular bit. I have readded the {{by whom}} template. Regards, — neuro19:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
The notability of the publisher does not guarantee the reliability of the author. It might be published by a noteworthy organization, but the article is written by a teenager. Let's consider the article on its merits alone: would you actually use a high school journalism report as a source in a Misplaced Pages article? Hopefully, you would say no, based on thee principal tenet of WP:RS: "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves." Furthermore, per WP:PRIMARY and WP:RS#Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, primary sources (such as interviews) are not considered "reliable for statements of interpretation, analysis or conclusion". In that case, we would need secondary sources. Nishkid64(Make articles, not wikidrama)21:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The sentence taken from the source, "Lauderdale considers reaching out to the community, like telling aspiring students about the work it takes to get to where he is and the endurance it takes to get there, to be a big part of his career." falls into the realm of "interpretation, analysis or conclusion". Per policy, primary sources aren't considered reliable for statements of interpretation, analysis or conclusion. Also, how does the second sentence add anything to the encyclopedia? It seems like a highly trivial detail, which reads like personal commentary/analysis. Nishkid64(Make articles, not wikidrama)22:35, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
You misunderstood me. The policy refers to statements of interpretation, analysis or conclusion from the source itself. That's exactly what the sentence is. The author of the paper is not stating fact (Lauderdale was born in XX place), she's offering her own personal commentary in claiming that Lauderdale's community outreach to be a big part of his career. If his service to the community is so profound, you shouldn't have any trouble finding a secondary source to back up the claim. That will satisfy my concerns. Nishkid64(Make articles, not wikidrama)23:38, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Dwight Lauderdale/Editnotice, by another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Dwight Lauderdale/Editnotice is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Misplaced Pages:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Dwight Lauderdale/Editnotice, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 23:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
