User talk:Txconservative1

Welcome!

Hello, Txconservative1, 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!

Edward DeVries[edit]

Thanks for doing all that legwork fact-checking his references. I have had similar concerns about this individual since I stumbled across his article. I find it extremely odd that the one verifiable fact I can locate about him on the internet, his board membership with the Christian Exodus, is unmentioned in the article. I, like you, am concerned about people being misled as to the importance and credibility of this person, and if I let myself give in to my bias, I'd have slapped a speedy delete on this so fast! However, we have to evaluate this article according to Wikipedia policies and not let our bias get the best of us. Fortunately, as it currently stands, this article seems to fail both notability and verifiability criteria. Please chime in at the nomination for deletion if you have anything to add. Steve Carlson^Talk 04:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edward DeVries: the saga continues[edit]

Hi, thanks for your response to my concerns about your post on Talk:Edward DeVries. Leaving a message on my talk page is absolutely the preferred way of conversing with other users one-on-one. I only posted on the article's talk page because I wanted concerned parties to see that concerned editors like me are actually trying very hard to maintain a WP:NPOV!

I don't think you need to delete your comments, just cease and desist from fanning the flames at this point. We have made some people close to E.D. very mad by challenging this article, so much so that they have launched a campaign of retaliatory vandalism against me and several other editors who got involved. If you or anyone else continues to post assertions of fraud, etc, the situation will probably escalate to even uglier proportions. The last thing we need here is for someone to slam Wikipedia with a libel suit over this. Given the potential for that outcome, you might want to check with User:Moonriddengirl about whether you should remove your post, since she is an admin who has taken a personal interest in this article.

As you are no doubt learning first hand, Wikipedia has a steeper learning curve than meets the eye, and there are a lot of policies and processes that aren't obvious at the outset. Please feel free to ask me or anyone else if you have any questions! Steve Carlson^Talk 23:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, after reading the talk page guidelines, I think we do need to remove your comments. Just go to Talk:Edward DeVries and click edit as you normally would, delete the two sections you created, including my response, and save it per normal. Thanks! Steve Carlson^Talk 00:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that, your heart is clearly in the right place. Wanting to spread the word about someone you believe to be doing wrong in order to protect others is a noble cause, but unfortunately, Wikipedia isn't the place for that! If you do ever happen to stumble across a citable source for your suspicions (e.g., if the Colorado Baptist Convention ever published the warning you say they issued on their website), they would be more than welcome here. Steve Carlson^Talk 17:19, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope this experience hasn't soured you on Wikipedia - I hope you continue to contribute to making this a first-rate body of knowledge! Steve Carlson^Talk 19:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]