Talk:Gary Miller

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject California This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
Gary Miller is part of WikiProject U.S. Congress, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the United States Congress.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
The options are: "FA", "A", "GA", "B", "Start", "Stub", "List", "Disambiguation", "Template", or "Category."
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
The options are: "Top", "High", "Mid", and "Low."
??? This article has not yet been assigned a subject.
The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", and "Event."

[edit] Real estate controversies

The "Real estate controversies" section has experienced a series of deletions by an unlogged-in editor at IP address 208.100.196.{193, 218, 229}. He hasn't left any clue as to his objections (he always leaves the edit summary blank) and I can't infer his goals by looking at his other edits since the only edits ever from these IP addresses have been these deletions. The section appears to be adequately sourced, but perhaps the tone of the section is too partisan? I'm quite new at editing Wikipedia, does anyone have any advice? --RP88 02:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and before I forget, to the editor at 208.100.196.{193,218,229}, please join this discussion. --RP88 02:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

My advice is to treat (a) anonymous IP edits which (b) simply delete text (c) without any explanation (any edit summary) and (d) come from an account used only for that deletion, as vandalism.
Having said that, it never hurts to do a quick review of the text for the more obvious problems. I've done so, and removed one phrase. But, in general, you're not required either to be a mind-reader or to extensively research a section just because one person (presumably very partisan) wants to suppress part of an article. There are a lot better uses of your time. John Broughton | Talk 03:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks John, I appreciate the advice. --RP88 08:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)