User talk:128.95.133.213

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Rhobite 02:23, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Rhobite 02:25, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

Cease and desist your vandalism of John Kerry. If you continue you will be banned from editing. -- oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 02:42, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

This is not vandalism. You are a partisan player. I have cited the source. Respect the truth as Wikipedia wishes. Stop removing edits based on your own political views. Admission to war crimes is important. Acknowledge it instead of hiding it.

Wikipedia is a place of neutral points of view. The first paragraph of each article is supposed to simply be an introduction. If you want to read about war atrocities, it doesn’t make sense to put them into the first paragraph. Oh, and if you want to preach about covering things up let us not forget what you removed from the George W. Bush article. -- oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 02:49, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

I removed the statement that george bush likes to watch gay porn in his free time. That is not a neutral point of view. Get your facts straight. I realized there was a section for the John Kerry article and moved the information there. Relax.

It's about time to remind you of the Wikipedia:Three revert rule. You are not allowed to revert the same article more than three times in a 24 hour period. Since you may not be aware of this rule, I will not report you until the next time you revert John Kerry. Please don't revert any more. If you have suggestions, make them on Talk:John Kerry. If you vandalize any article again, I'll block you from editing immediately. Rhobite 03:04, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

Don't turn this into a partisan war. Nowhere in the Wikipedia rules does it say that we need to stay away from large quotes. Your incredible liberal bias is hilarious. If you cannot accept your own hero's quotes, you have serious problems. You cannot ban me because your only form of ban would be Via IP address. You should understand that an IP address can EASILY be changed. Don't start a fight. Either fill in the words in the quote you want or accept the truth. There is no POV in the edit. It is factual. You have no right to argue. Report all you like.

Every word you quote may be factual. But which facts we choose to express and omit, what their context is, are also ways to express a point of view. The relevant material has already been included and summarized. You're right, of course, that IPs can be changed easily, and you can come back under another address and continue inserting material which will only continue to be challenged until you bring forth a compelling argument for it. If your strongest argument for inclusion of this material is that we "can't ban you", I would consider thinking it out more fully and then presenting your ideas for making this page more neutral on the Talk page. In fact, you'll have to; I see the page has been protected. Kerry's actions in Vietnam have been documented in the article already; the material you have added implies that he was particularly guilty -- in fact, a previous edit made a comparison to Hitler -- whereas the other material seems to imply that he was as guilty as, but no guiltier than, any other person who served. Which seems to me to be the neutral point of view. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:51, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] John Kerry

Hi, 128.95.133.213, I'm a bit insulted that you called my revert a liberal bias. ... I don't know much of anything about Kerry, but I do know your edit wasn't correctly placed in the article... and looked like simple vandalism. I see you're new to wikipedia, so welcome! Perhaps you should start off editing some articles you feel less strongly about, so you can get a hang of the style of the project? You have been listed on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR so you will likely be banned soon. You should take that time off to go read up on wikipedia and learn about our community and our editing styles. That way you'll learn how to make sure all perspectives are well presented in an article without trigginer people to revert your edits as POV pushing.--Gmaxwell 03:40, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My friend, you need to examine the edit i made. I added a quote and cited it. Is that wrong? Is wikipedia against quotes? Are you the one in charge of making such decisions? It WAS correctly placed in the article because i changed the part that had the same information and simply expanded the quote. If you think this is pressing some point of view then you ARE biased. If you are afraid of people knowing Mr. Kerry's quote because of its power and implications, then you are guilty. If Wikipedia is run by liberals who enforce their will by removing things that make their heroes look bad, then god help it. I am trying to add to the honesty of your community. As for being banned, i am sure that i will not be banned and if i am, it is only a black mark on this website. Thank you.

I read it, had I not read it I wouldn't have thought it was vandalism and reverted it. There is a whole section where his war involvement is covered... That much is clear to someone who only took a 30 second glance at the article. Perhaps you are right that the article needs your material to be more neutral? I don't know. But I do know that it was out of place in the intro, and that you broke community standards by fighting against the consensus. If your interest is really in making the article more neutral, then after some discussion you will find few that will resist an effort to add information in the right places (which probably isn't the intro).--Gmaxwell 03:56, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For starters, you removed the sentence I wrote which explained how the quote was in the context of Kerry's opposition to certain tactics employed by military leaders in the Vietnam war. Instead of this sentence, you wrote that Kerry "admitted to having committed war crimes", a false claim. Kerry admitted to committing atrocities, not war crimes. The two are not equivalent. Rhobite 04:03, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

This is hilarious. You claim you have the right to state what John Kerry was referring to when he said what he did? You are the authority of John Kerry's words? What YOU wrote was POV. A quote is never POV. Rhobite, you're a corrupt editor. I put down a quote and you get mad because i remove a part YOU wrote which tells WHY Kerry said what he did because, of course, YOU KNOW WHY JOHN KERRY SAID IT. Right? Please teach me this telepathy trick.

[edit] A thought...

Surely you must be aware that carrying on about "liberal bias" isn't going to win you any fans? By removing relevant info from George W. Bush (here [1]) and then adding a thirty-year old quote out of context to John Kerry, you put strain on our efforts to "assume good faith." --Feitclub 03:52, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

It may not help me win support but it is the truth no doubt. I never removed relevant information from the George Bush site. The only thing i removed was a statement that said something along the lines of: George Bush enjoys gay porn in his free time. I think i may have removed another blatantly POV statement. You need to stop the bandwagon support for editors. This is the kind of mentality that leads to people like Dan Rather airing completely fradulent information. If you know something is wrong, stand up to the people who present that view, don't just kiss the butt of the editors and hope to get a treat. I know i'm right on this.

You insist that your edit to George W. Bush was benign but the link above proves you are lying. I don't know what your intentions are but lying turns people off. Big time. Best of luck with your efforts, I guess. You'll need it. --Feitclub 04:21, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Feitclub. Clear bias in my opinion but we see this in here time and time again so it's nothing new, let's just keep enforcing NPOV and do the best we can. -- oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 04:23, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)


This page has been automatically marked for deletion under the criteria for speedy deletion U2 (recycling IP talk pages). If you are adding a new message, please remove this notice.