User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! WilyD 17:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008[edit]


Hi, the recent edit you made to Socialist Workers Party (Britain) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Thingg 17:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


The recent edit you made to Workers' Revolutionary Party (UK) constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. Thingg 17:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC))

Nuvola apps important.svg

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to General Electric. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. J.delanoygabsadds 18:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: General Electric[edit]

If you actually read Category:American criminals, you would find that GE cannot be included in that category.

So yes, your edit was vandalism, and I will not remove the warning. J.delanoygabsadds 18:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, corporations are legal persons. The relevant part of that quote is can claim notability solely because of the crime. GE's convictions were picayune, and if the company weren't already notable these wouldn't have made it so. Therefore it doesn't belong in the category. It would be hard to find a major corporation with a long history that hasn't been convicted of something, somewhere. -- Zsero (talk) 02:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Stop hand nuvola.svg

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to General Electric. The Helpful One (Review) 18:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Would any of you please bother reading the relevant categories and links rather than making straw man arguments? As established, under the law, GE is a person and J.delanoy is therefore incorrect in claiming that GE is not capable of being considered a criminal. Moreover, if you bothered reading the links, you would be aware that GE defrauded the United States Government of $26.5 million and engaging in illegal arms sales abroad. Such fraud is notable in and of itself due to its scale and involvement in the international arms trade. Please also note that Martha Stewart is listed in the category, which you do not claim to be vandalism or inappropriate for the category due to the fact that her crimes were quite a bit smaller than those of GE in terms of the scale of fraud committed and the global impact of the crime. Also, the reference to GE's offences as federal felonies in the United States provide some context as to the nature of the criminal action and cannot constitute vandalism. Please admit that your allegations against me are false and commit yourself to understanding the nature of corporate personhood and the scale of criminal offences in the USA before your ignorance leads you to make similarly erroneous statements in the future. -- (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Whether or not GE is considered a person before the law is irrelevant. We are talking about a Wikipedia category, which clearly is speaking of living (or deceased) human beings, not corporations. J.delanoygabsadds 14:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, Zsero is correct. GE is notable even if they never committed a crime. J.delanoygabsadds 14:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I will quote Category:American criminals again:

Two problems:

  1. The entire category consists of human beings. GE is not a human being.
  2. For inclusion in this category, the person must be able to "claim notability solely because of the crime."

Until you provide satisfactory explanations as to how GE meets both of those criteria, you will not hear from me again. Unless I warn you again for re-adding the category to GE. J.delanoygabsadds 17:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)