User talk:46.7.85.68: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:36, 10 June 2016

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create an account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

Create new pages, and customize the appearance and behavior of the website
Rename pages
Edit semi-protected pages
Upload images
Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed
Utilize a vast array of editing tools

In addition, your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! Keri (talk) 07:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Mail and Mickey Rooney

I agree with you, but wanted to point out that you were commenting on an old discussion. If there's specific information that you feel should be added, I recommend that you go to the talk page of the article and comment on that point at the very bottom of the page. Also you may find it advantageous to register for a user account. Coretheapple (talk) 16:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages and BLP

You comments at Talk:Tanya Nicole Kach were not appropriate. Your opinions and interpretations do not help improve the article and you must not speculate about living people in the way you did. Per WP:BLPREMOVE I have removed the comments and collapsed the discussion. Please only use high-quality reliable sources when discussing controversial issues relating to living people. Please also read Wikipedia:Child protection#Apparent on-wiki advocacy. Fences&Windows 11:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. My issue was that the person who submitted the article was himself indulging in personal opinion. One example being his acceptance that Hose did not meet the accepted definition of a Paedophile, but he still described him as such. My point in posting to that talk page was to highlight the OP's apparent bias. The fact is that since then, the article has been radically re-written and now represents a much more Neutral Point of View. I believe that vindicates my previous comments.

My intent was not to impose my opinions on the article, but to see the OP's personal opinions removed. As such, I had to show the contradictions to the opinions he expressed. His response was to dismiss anything that was contrary to his opinion because it was sourced from a TV doc that he described as "sensationalist". Had the OP commented along the lines of, "A later TV documentary questions the veracity of some of Kach's claims e.g.... ", I would not have raised the issue. These were not the only issues I had with the OP. Another point was that he misrepresented the Pennsylvania statute in order to further his own argument that "Interference in Child Custody" and "Kidnap" were one and the same crime, which they are not46.7.85.68 (talk) 10:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 == Talk pages and BLP ==
 You comments at [[Talk:Tanya Nicole Kach]] were not appropriate. Your opinions and interpretations do not help improve the article and you must not speculate about living people in the way you did. Per [[WP:BLPREMOVE]] I have removed the comments and collapsed the discussion. Please only use high-quality [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] when discussing controversial issues relating to living people. Please also read [[Wikipedia:Child protection#Apparent on-wiki advocacy]]. [[User:Fences and windows|<span style="background-color:white; color:red;">Fences</span>]]<span style="background-color:white; color:#808080;">&amp;</span>[[User talk:Fences and windows|<span style="background-color:white; color:black;">Windows</span>]] 11:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
+Thanks for your message. My issue was that the person who submitted the article was himself indulging in personal opinion. One example being his acceptance that Hose did not meet the accepted definition of a Paedophile, but he still described him as such. My point in posting to that talk page was to highlight the OP's apparent bias. The fact is that since then, the article has been radically re-written and now represents a much more Neutral Point of View. I believe that vindicates my previous comments.
+My intent was not to impose my opinions on the article, but to see the OP's personal opinions removed. As such, I had to show the contradictions to the opinions he expressed. His response was to dismiss anything that was contrary to his opinion because it was sourced from a TV doc that he described as "sensationalist". Had the OP commented along the lines of, "A later TV documentary questions the veracity of some of Kach's claims e.g....  ", I would not have raised the issue. These were not the only issues I had with the OP. Another point was that he misrepresented the Pennsylvania statute in order to further his own argument that "Interference in Child Custody" and "Kidnap" were one and the same crime, which they are not[[Special:Contributions/46.7.85.68|46.7.85.68]] ([[User talk:46.7.85.68#top|talk]]) 10:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)