Sull,

It may seem discouraging to have your content deleted but I've had
conversations with you in the past on the importance of verifiability.  Yes,
I nominated 'Crowdfunding' for deletion.  However, other editors voted and
agreed that it should not be a wikipedia article. It didn't contain any
sources, the topic was non notable by Wikipedia standards and the article
consisted entirely of original research.  (A violation of Wikipedia's core
content policies)

See the discussion here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crowdfunding

You also failed to mention that the 'Crowdfunding' article has been deleted
on 2 other occasions in which I had no involvement or knowledge of.

Yes, Mmeiser and I have been in an edit war over the Video blog article's
content for many of the same reasons.  For months I have tried to discuss
the encyclopedic reasons for removing original research, indiscriminate
links, and the need to cite content from the article.  As responses, I
received long, ranting, personal attacks and he refused to address my
encyclopedic reasoning.

What hasn't been mentioned yet is how Mmeiser recently sought the help of a
Wikipedia Administrator.  The result was not surprising.

a) The administrator did not reinstate the content.

b) On the contrary, the administrator cited the important of verifiability
and suggested to Mmeiser that he try editing content on a separate page and
have me look it over and give him suggestions before he place it into the
article. (an extreme I still don't think is necessary as long as he uses
citations when making contributions)

I tried to extend an olive branch and asked that we work together
constructively to reintroduce the content with sources.  (what i had been
trying to do all along)  He, once again, wrote a long rant, made personal
attacks, and announced he was through contributing to the Video blog
article.

To date, Mmeiser has contributed a total of one verifiable piece of content
to the article. (which i have never deleted)

It's sometimes difficult to read a long emotional argument like those of
Mmeiser without being moved to feel the same emotions.  This is what I
assume happened when I was called pathetic, a loser, a troll, etc by group
members earlier.

Unfortunately, for Mmeiser and some others in this group, personal attacks
don't carry much weight in civilized discussions regarding encyclopedic
content.

Since the yahoo group discussion began, we've had three people contribute
encyclopedic content to the article: Ruperthowe, Bullemhead and myself.  For
the amount of discussion we've had in this group, I'd like to see more
happening to the article.  Let's keep improving it.

I'm want to get some third party comments in a week or so after we've done
some work on it.

Patrick


On 5/1/07, sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   that user was also responsible for the deletion of my article
> 'Crowdfunding'.
> and yes, meiser has been battling for months.
> fucking wikipedia. i dont have the time nor patience for such games.
>
> On 4/29/07, Michael Verdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<michael%40michaelverdi.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> > This user - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pdelongchamp - constantly
> > fucks with the entry (deleting everything useful in it). It's pathetic.
> I
> > can't believe Meiser still has the patience to try work on the article
> as
> > his changes usually get deleted within hours.
> >
> > - Verdi
> >
> > On 4/29/07, Jan McLaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<jannie.jan%40gmail.com><
> jannie.jan%40gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Has rather been decimated.
> > >
> > > Wow.
> > >
> > > Anybody?
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlog
> > >
> > > Jan
> > >
> > > --
> > > The Faux Press - better than real
> > > http://fauxpress.blogspot.com
> > > http://twitter.com/fauxpress
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > http://michaelverdi.com
> > http://spinxpress.com
> > http://freevlog.org
> > Author of Secrets Of Videoblogging - http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to