User talk:Deor

Archives:

User talk:Deor/Archive1 (12/2006–12/2007)
User talk:Deor/Archive2 (1/2008–6/2008)
User talk:Deor/Archive3 (7/2008–12/2008)
User talk:Deor/Archive4 (1/2009–6/2009)

From Pagetools

I noticed that you are removing some of my history sections. I think those sections are relevant because they assist in organization and expansion of the topics- they also follow the structure that is on other pages- it's a matter of organization and consistancy, no. The page is better constructed...your thoughts?Pagetools (talk) 18:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All that I've been removing is unsourced or improperly sourced material. Deor (talk) 18:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you define improperly sourced materials?Pagetools (talk) 18:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles (especially deleted ones) can't be used to source information in other Wikipedia articles, for example. I don't really want to discuss this any further at the moment; let's see how the sockpuppet investigation turns out. Deor (talk) 18:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But if an article is deleted just because of suspected sockpuppetry, that doesn't mean that the information, or the sourcing , within the the former article was ever invalid. It can still be a good source of vaild information or referencing, no?Pagetools (talk) 19:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deor, I have just found out, by a little research on line, that you are one of the adminstrators who has an agenda against Barbaro-family subject matter. Here is a link proving that: [[1]].

I do not appreciate to be involved in your agenda of removing all Barbaro-family subject matter pertaing to the Albergo branch- and I would appreciate if you leave me alone from this point forward. I felt it was a wee bit suspicious that you took notice in me after I did some legitimate organization to the Barbaro-family page. If your behavior continues, Wikipedia will be notifed of your unprofessional behavior. Thank youPagetools (talk) 23:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]