User talk:67.160.229.161

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] September 2007

With regard to your comments on Gary Radnich: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Xdenizen 01:11, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Content that deliberately seeks to undermine the integrity of wikipedia is vandalism; your latest contributions clearly fit that definition. You might want to undo them to avoid being blocked by wikimedia administration.--mark dittmer Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Dave Flemming, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: Flemming&diff=next&oldid=154041695 link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Davidovic 04:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] October 2007

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Gary Radnich, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. CrazyChemGuy 23:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Crazy people don't get to tell me my contributions are lacking. Cite to Spander has been much discussed to the point of consensus before DimWit simply erased it. This thread goes back much longer than DimWit's particpation. 67.160.229.161 23:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

[edit] October 2007 #2

The previous discussion you cite of the Spander citation in no way comes to a consensus that it is in any way appropriate.

There is no arguing that the link (to an article by Art Spander about a controversy that surrounded KNBR talk show host Larry Krueger) is not primarily about Gary Radnich, and only mentions him tangentially. Therefore, the only reason it's been linked here is to insinuate that Radnich is a racist, and there is no factual support for such an insinuation.

The introductory paragraph at the beginning of the "Reactions" section is not very important. But this Spander link, introduced in the text as "Art Spander panned Radnich for his support of Larry Krueger's racist comments," is inflammatory and so misleading as to take away from the integrity of wikipedia. It is essentially vandalism. Mark Dittmer


[edit] Please Review Marketing Material POV

Are Tenor and Dim Wit professional Wiki entry writers? [1] Look at their contrib history and their watchdog stance on anything *they* interpret to be non-neutral. Apparently, as Orwell predicted, our language has lost meaning. Non-neutural doesn't mean "must be flattering". There has been plenty of discussion that they can stick up for their employers by *adding* content rather than deleting it. Since they continue to insist on calling all non-flattering but verifiable information about their employer vandalism, perhaps you should just delete the article. Would you find an entry on Gary Radnich in britanica?

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Gary_Radnich, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.

67.160.229.161 07:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Ian Cairns 22:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)