User talk:Rsmatesix

Mumia Abu-Jamal entry

You can continue to try and add that paragraph and I will delete it every time. It is clearly biased and unsourced.--Looper5920 04:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop inserting your PoV into this article. It will only wind up being reverted, and you'll eventually be blocked because of it. --68.80.241.225 06:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I stepped back and took a deep breath before I replied to the wonderful piece of prose you placed on my talk page. First let me say thank you for the promotion. You addressed me as Maj. Doofus when in fact I am only a Captain. Maybe someday?? I can imagine your surprise when you realized you were lucky enough to be arguing with a brain dead person. I am sure that was right after you read Wikipedia's policies, especially those related to editing articles such as maintaining a neutral point of view WP:NPOV and of course refraining from personal attacks WP:NPA. My brain death is not my own fault and you should not be making light of it. As to my own biases they are in favor of Daniel Faulkner and his family. I believe Jamal recieved a fair trial and the fact that he has not been put to death is a travesty of justice. That being said, keeping a NPOV in this article refrains me from adding things such as the quote from the T-shirt I own that states, " Officer Danny Faulkner was murdered by Mumia Abu Jamal who shouldn't be in a 8 x 10 foot cell. He should be 6 feet closer to hell." I firmly believe it but realize it may be a "bit" biased. Just as your comments on him not recieving a fair trial and the Philly D.A.'s office using illegal and unethical tactics are biased. Especially based on the fact that there is no research to back them up. This leads to the last point. While I am sure that the "informational flyer published by the Western Pennsylvania Committee to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal" is a fascinating read it probably is not the most reliable of sources. I guessing from the name of this group that they may have a particular bias in one direction. You should probably read the Wikipedia policy on reliable sources (WP:RS) prior to making anymore edits. I apologize if you were bothered by my "imperious meddling", however I will restate, that if you continue to try and add that paragrapgh I will revert it evert time. If you feel this is unfair than I highly encourage you to read the policy for resolving disputes WP:DR and move from there. Sincerely--Looper5920 07:57, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome! I'm sorry your first edits were met with hostility, that's really too bad. I'm a longtime Mumia supporter (for example, I was at Millions for Mumia in '99) and I'm certainly aware of & understand the idea that no writing can be nonbiased. That said, I do have to say I support the neutral point of view policy, because it's important for an encyclopedia to try to be as neutral as possible. Otherwise the encyclopedia just won't be a reputable source, and no one will come to it for info (and, I'm afraid, most opinions put in here won't be ones we agree with!). The citing sources requirement helps with keeping entries factual. I'm glad to discuss this further or try to answer any questions you may have on my talk page. Anyway, hope this sour experience doesn't keep you from continuing to contribute! Peace, delldot | talk 14:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]