Jump to content

Talk:Rubén Hinojosa: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Hounding: new section
Line 20: Line 20:
[[User:Loonymonkey]] has reverted my edits again, without using the talk page, without discussing anything. I'd like to know why he insists on not using the talk page as it is a violation of [[WP:Consensus]]. I'd love to talk with him about whatever [[WP:BLP]] issues he has. [[User:Starbucksian|Starbucksian]] ([[User talk:Starbucksian|talk]]) 10:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
[[User:Loonymonkey]] has reverted my edits again, without using the talk page, without discussing anything. I'd like to know why he insists on not using the talk page as it is a violation of [[WP:Consensus]]. I'd love to talk with him about whatever [[WP:BLP]] issues he has. [[User:Starbucksian|Starbucksian]] ([[User talk:Starbucksian|talk]]) 10:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
:Not this again. What consensus are you talking about? It's been explained to you repeatedly that the person adding the material needs to build consensus. It is not up to other editors to "justify" point by point what is wrong with your edits, it's up to you to explain why they belong. [[WP:BRD]] is not WP:BRDRRRRRRR]]. Also, you're well aware that there are certain rules for a [[WP:BLP]], that questionable material must be removed immediately, and that anyone who restores that material will be blocked for edit-warring (as you were). As for the material, too many problems to list individually, but my edit-summary was a good start. Do you really think that blogs and the Wikipedian are reliable sources for a BLP? And why did you remove the standard Congressional committee assignments section and replace it some editorial criticism. That's just absurdly [[WP:TEND|tendentious]]. --[[User:Loonymonkey|Loonymonkey]] ([[User talk:Loonymonkey|talk]]) 14:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
:Not this again. What consensus are you talking about? It's been explained to you repeatedly that the person adding the material needs to build consensus. It is not up to other editors to "justify" point by point what is wrong with your edits, it's up to you to explain why they belong. [[WP:BRD]] is not WP:BRDRRRRRRR]]. Also, you're well aware that there are certain rules for a [[WP:BLP]], that questionable material must be removed immediately, and that anyone who restores that material will be blocked for edit-warring (as you were). As for the material, too many problems to list individually, but my edit-summary was a good start. Do you really think that blogs and the Wikipedian are reliable sources for a BLP? And why did you remove the standard Congressional committee assignments section and replace it some editorial criticism. That's just absurdly [[WP:TEND|tendentious]]. --[[User:Loonymonkey|Loonymonkey]] ([[User talk:Loonymonkey|talk]]) 14:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

== Hounding ==

Looney, this is the second account ([[Lee Fang]] being the first) you've taken interest in that Starbucksian also edits. You may be in violation of [[WP:Hound]].[[User:Tommyboy1215|Tommyboy1215]] ([[User talk:Tommyboy1215|talk]]) 15:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:27, 1 September 2011

WikiProject iconBiography Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Template:UTTalk

WikiProject iconUnited States: Texas Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Texas.
WikiProject iconUnited States: Mexican-Americans Stub‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Mexican-American task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Unsourced Allegations

It has been observed by Orlady (talk) that there are many un-sourced allegations on this article. Should we remove those sentences, or just heavily edit them? Austudent1 00:42 August 30, 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 00:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Here we go again, friends!

User:Loonymonkey has reverted my edits again, without using the talk page, without discussing anything. I'd like to know why he insists on not using the talk page as it is a violation of WP:Consensus. I'd love to talk with him about whatever WP:BLP issues he has. Starbucksian (talk) 10:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not this again. What consensus are you talking about? It's been explained to you repeatedly that the person adding the material needs to build consensus. It is not up to other editors to "justify" point by point what is wrong with your edits, it's up to you to explain why they belong. WP:BRD is not WP:BRDRRRRRRR]]. Also, you're well aware that there are certain rules for a WP:BLP, that questionable material must be removed immediately, and that anyone who restores that material will be blocked for edit-warring (as you were). As for the material, too many problems to list individually, but my edit-summary was a good start. Do you really think that blogs and the Wikipedian are reliable sources for a BLP? And why did you remove the standard Congressional committee assignments section and replace it some editorial criticism. That's just absurdly tendentious. --Loonymonkey (talk) 14:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hounding

Looney, this is the second account (Lee Fang being the first) you've taken interest in that Starbucksian also edits. You may be in violation of WP:Hound.Tommyboy1215 (talk) 15:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rubén_Hinojosa&oldid=447870699"