LDan wrote:
Almost all of Wikipedia is unsourced!
Yeah, so? And the great, great majority of that information is easily confirmed. We are talking about the stuff that cannot be easily confirmed /when somebody checks/.
If you have a question about the source, just ask whoever wrote it.
That isn't always so easy. Besides the question has to do with the article, so the best place for that is the talk page. You are operating on the assumption that the person who wrote the material is really the only person who could answer the question - not so. If the material is in fact legit, then any number of people who visit that article's talk page can respond.
That way, they will be a lot quicker to respond.
If the removal is more than a smallish paragraph, then it would make sense to also inform the user directly. But, only when this info is easily obtained without having to sort through dozens of diffs.
I almost never watch articles I write,
That is your choice.
and if someone took off some of my content because it's"unsourced", there's little chance I'd go back
and
find it and write the source.
If you care about that, then hit 'Watch this page' more often.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
RK writes on User talk:Jtdrl
I find what you have been writing about me frightly hateful and dishonest. The main problems, however, remain. You and your friends still are allowing a proven pro-Nazi viewpoint to be pushed on Wikipedia from Stevertigo and his friend Martin; the documentation came from his own edits, and has been analyzed by experts on the subject. Yet the Nazis are the heros here? That's isn't NPOV, that is anti-Semitism. Your refusal to admit this tells me things about you that I would rather not have learned. RK 00:51, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)
"Experts", eh? Doesnt it "take one to know one"?
Also, I see that you still pretend to be confused about the issue. Two people kept harassing me on my own User Talkpage. I excercised my right to remove their comments from my Talk User page. All Wikipedia users have always had that right. Yet then other Wikipedians such as Angela began harassing me; shockingly, they reverted my edits to my own page, and restored the harassment. When I reported this non-stop harassment to the Wiki list, no one helped, and in fact people slandered me. You yourseld didn't do a damn thing to stop this harassment and vandalism; you never asked for them to be banned. So you left me no other option, literally. I thus was forced to temporarilly do the same thing to them that they did to me. However, I also mentioned this action to the WikiEn list...I was making a very simple point: If it is wrong for someone to do this to you, then it is also wrong for you to do this to someone else. Yet you allowed their harassment of me, and simultaneously pretended that they could not understand this point. You topped it off by falsely accusing me of vanalism. Well, that is just pathetic. RK 00:51, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Still doesnt get it.
I wonder how much harassment I can put on someone else's page (perhaps yours?) until I see someone (perhaps you?) remove it? Then I can do this again and again until you take action...and then you would be banned? Does this sound reasonable to you? Frankly, to me this course of action sounds like harassment, and its totally insane. Why you think that it was Ok for others to do to me, but not for this to be done to anyone else? Please do not continue with such harassment. RK 00:51, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Still tries to equate comments on Talk with
Vandalism/harrassment.
~S~
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com