User talk:Bizreporter: Difference between revisions
Bizreporter (talk | contribs) |
Bizreporter (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I have been using Wikipedia for years and have found NUMEROUS posts about the negative aspect of most large organizations such as the one you deleted about the Elks. You can search almost any large organization in Wikipedia and you will find external links with the darker and controversial side of the organization. |
I have been using Wikipedia for years and have found NUMEROUS posts about the negative aspect of most large organizations such as the one you deleted about the Elks. You can search almost any large organization in Wikipedia and you will find external links with the darker and controversial side of the organization. |
||
It therefore seem that you |
It therefore seem that you are a member of the Elks and are determined to prevent ANY negative aspects of the organization from being made public. I feel you are the one who is violating Wikipedia's neutral point of view by PREVENTING the facts about how the Elks have behaved very badly in this case and it deserves to be made public. |
||
Who gave you the authority to have total control over the content of what appears in Wikipedia on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_and_Protective_Order_of_Elks? |
Who gave you the authority to have total control over the content of what appears in Wikipedia on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_and_Protective_Order_of_Elks? |
||
I am going to add the external link about the Elks again and if you remove it, I will submit this matter to arbitration. I tried to add this information sveral years ago and you removed it then. YOU do not own Wikipedia. It is open for the public to post the facts about subjects. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring |
|||
Latest revision as of 12:38, 1 August 2009
July 2009
[edit]
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Manway (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
I have been using Wikipedia for years and have found NUMEROUS posts about the negative aspect of most large organizations such as the one you deleted about the Elks. You can search almost any large organization in Wikipedia and you will find external links with the darker and controversial side of the organization.
It therefore seem that you are a member of the Elks and are determined to prevent ANY negative aspects of the organization from being made public. I feel you are the one who is violating Wikipedia's neutral point of view by PREVENTING the facts about how the Elks have behaved very badly in this case and it deserves to be made public.
Who gave you the authority to have total control over the content of what appears in Wikipedia on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_and_Protective_Order_of_Elks?
I am going to add the external link about the Elks again and if you remove it, I will submit this matter to arbitration. I tried to add this information sveral years ago and you removed it then. YOU do not own Wikipedia. It is open for the public to post the facts about subjects.
I will file a complaint about your censorship to Wikipedia if you remove it again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring