User talk:EdwardG

Capone

I see what you mean about how the baseball bat bit is meaningful for character development, but I deleted it for two reasons: 1) there are at least 3 versions of who was doing the beating - or it may be completely myth 2) it didn't really change the arc of Capone's career

If you want to treat this incident in an encyclopedic way, you need to consider and reference several sources. As is, the explanation differs from other accounts of the same incident in Wikipedia (See John Scalise).

I hate to be the guy that nags "More references" "Explain other theories", but when it comes to Capone, there's often more myth than fact, as Geraldo learned the hard way. Ghosts&empties 17:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tucker Max

Thanks for the edits on the tucker max article. I think you really helped improve the NPOV problem that article is having! --Bill.matthews 23:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

K-Fed Link tickets

I was the one to add the reference to the tickets being given away in the Norfolk, Va. Link publication. Instead of contacting me when the issue came up, you just removed it, which I find to be pretty rude. Research stuff before you remove it. It's mentioned on the publication's MySpace page [1] and I could provide you copies of the front page that Friday if you don't believe me.

If you're going to remove facts, be so kind as to actually get a hold of people especially when the information is easily verifiable. - Stick Fig 23:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

K-Fed's sex tape

Let me try to explain my position. The sex tape is big news. It has been established that it is not libelous. It is clearly relevant to the article. The ONLY reason why we care about Kevin Federline at all is because he married Britney Spears. All of the news stories that have been included about the sex tape have been cited. They all seem credible. None of them seem libelous, or pure gossip (unless the wool has been pulled over all of our eyes in which case the lies themselves are newsworthy and belong on the page.) Let me know what you think. I've asked for more opinions. --Cdogsimmons 03:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What satire are you referring to? I did a google search and didn't find anything. --Cdogsimmons 17:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

K-Fed musician section too long

Good and bad reviews are relevant, but they need to acheive a balance. The Musician section was way too long. Even after my clipping it (again, which I will doo every day for 20 years if need be) we are left with one positive review and 4 negatives. Do you REALLY think we need one positive and 7 negative? The current version achieves a NPOV and should be left alone. Michaelh2001 17:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]