Sarah, I'm beginning to see that you really have no qualms about misrepresenting facts in attempts to benefit your cause. You've already said in effect that I was coming out of nowhere and disrupting the article when you were fully aware that I've edited in regards to this article previously. Now, when I'm primarily counseling a fellow editor to not edit war you're describing it nefariously as my "leaving instructions as to what they should do". Well of course it's not in the project's interest that editors edit war so it makes sense that I'm advising a fellow editor against it. If I've spent the best part of the day on this, what have you done?
Where's that assumption of good faith we're always talking about around here?
-Scott [[User:Netscott]]
On 8/25/06, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/24/06, Scott Stevenson wikinetscott@gmail.com wrote:
Sounding more and more like original research to include it on the new anti-Semitism
article
isn't it?
There are multiple sources who say this image is an example of anti-Semitism. There's no need to rely on the photographer, and if you had done even two minutes of research (literally), you'd know that. But you haven't, because your interest is not NPOV and Wikipedia and encyclopedic standards. You object to the image for political reasons, pure and simple, and you're trying to wikilawyer your way to either getting it removed or adding a cutline that will lead to edit wars in the future and instability. You've spent the best part of the day on this, and now, not satisfied with involving AN/I and wikiEN-l, you're leaving notes on talk pages trying to involve others too (because you've already violated 3RR), leaving instructions as to what they should do. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AYArktos&diff=prev&a... I think this will be my last response to you.
Sarah _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l