User talk:MRMKJason

WTF?

Blogs and forums are for debating issues, not spinning facts.

Since when?!? 'Blogs have been spinning facts from almost the beginning, if not indeed the very beginning. And if facts could not be spun in forums, then there would be nowhere for them to be spun.

In any event, all that you are accomplishing by spinning an article is giving your opponents a greater sense of license in their own attempts to spin. If you really think that you're right, you should show the world that (unlike some), you're not afraid to let the facts speak for themselves instead of giving them some sort of tone or accent. —12.72.68.8 17:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard for the facts to speak for themselves when an official transcript, and video are removed. C56C 05:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No official transcript was removed; what was removed was your worked version of the transcript. Since the official transcript is available (and quoted on the discussion page), if a legitimate section could be written about that section, there is no excuse for not using it. You've not interest in letting facts speak for themselves; you are either a troll or someone who has no grasp of the difference between persuasive rhetoric and actuality. —12.72.120.97 10:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Regarding the removal of semi-protection: Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. C56C 05:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has become clear that the semi-protection was effected as a deliberate act of vandalism by an ill-appointed administrator, or by a pseudo-administrator. And, while I have disagreed (as above) with MRMKJason, he is plainly not a “vandal” under the Wikipedia definition, which is why he was not blocked after undoing the semi-protection. (The ill-appointed or psuedo-administrator knows that the ice is too thin for that.) —12.72.120.97 11:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a) removal of the tag will not remove semi-protection so removal of the tag is vandalism. b) The use of the tag looks fine to me (as another admin) c) It would be strongly appreciated if discussions about material one disagrees with occured on the talk page rather than simply blanking large sections of the article. JoshuaZ 13:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, (a) The fact that removal of the taq is ineffectual doesn't make it vandalism. (If, indeed, all that MRMKJason did was to remove the tag.) (b) If, indeed, what is debated here is “[t]he use of the tag”, then whether its removal would be vandalism would hang on more than whether it “looks fine” to someone, admin or not. (c) For quite a while, the only person attempting to discuss things on the talk page was me; yet the semi-protection was imposed ostensibly because I wasn't discussing changes at all. So the semi-protection itself (tag or no) should look ridiculous (rather than fine) to you. (The sections on the talk page titled ‘The Budget Deficit’, ‘“politicization”’, ‘“cutting pork”’, ‘Confrontation with Chris Matthews’, ‘Bleh’, and ‘Matthews Transcription’ were all begun by me. Jointly, they constitute most of the discussion on the talk page.) —12.72.121.84 18:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BlackFive

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia by creating the page BlackFive. Your test worked, and has been or will soon be removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Please see WP:WEB. NawlinWiki 21:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:TheBlogOfWar003.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheBlogOfWar003.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]