Canadian Kid wrote:
I would like to know who, if anyone, can help my IP
(64.230.123.119)
get unblocked?
I have apparently been blocked for spreading rumours without them
being documented. I would like, however, to offer the following points.
1. on the issue of the Conservative Party moving the airborn to CFB
Trenton and out of my MPs riding (who has been fighting to bring it
here) I noted that my MPs own party has stolen an issue right out from
underneath her. The following was noted in the edit history: "PLEASE
Document rumours before you put them in. The CPC website doesn't
mention moving the airborne to Trenton anywhere. It's JUST A RUMOUR
unless its documented)" I would kindly ask you, however, check out
http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&template_…
where you will find in the December 13, 2005 video of Talk Politics ,
at the 32 minute 15 second mark of the video, the Conservative Party's
Defence Critic, Gordon O'Connor, stating that his party wishes to
reincarnate the airborn in CFB Trenton.
2. Another issue facing this MP is an investogation by the Privacy
Commissioner of Canada related to how her office received and then
used personal information - likely from passport applications. I cited
the Pembroke Observer Newspaper
link(http://www.thedailyobserver.ca/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentID=138630&catname=Local+News)
that clearly shows that a Deep River couple has contacted the Privacy
Commissioner of Canada. I will admit that the online article does not
have 100% of the article showing, however that is not the point. I was
asked to provide proof and I have. If the administrators are so
concerned about whether my edit was truthful then they can buy a copy
of the Pembroke Observer and see that the edit reflects the truth and
that residents have asked, in the middle of an election, the Privacy
Commissioner of Canada to investogate their MP - I would suggest that
this worth posting.
Could someone please help. I believe I have tried, very hard, to meet
the standards asked of me - ie providing proof, and yet still they
block me.
Please help :)
Sara
For reference, the history of the article in question is available at:*
http://tinyurl.com/ajhh4*
I'm not familiar with this particular politician or issue, so looking at
it objectively, here are my thoughts. On point number 1, you didn't
provide this proof at all, which is why it was removed from the article
— editors aren't able to magically divine sources that you don't
provide. On point number 2, it wasn't removed for lack of evidence, it
was removed because several editors believe it isn't yet important
enough to warrant a mention in her biographical article. The block was
probably a little premature, but it will expire soon, and in the future,
you should discuss controversial edits on the article's talk page first,
or after they've been reverted once and before you revert back.
Communication and providing sources go a long way in content disputes.
Just a little friendly advice.
--
Regards,
[[:en:User:Bbatsell]]