User talk:67.169.194.181

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once again: Kindly stop deleting relevant information and links from the Perverted-Justice.com article. You're violating several Wikipedia policies through your current actions, including the neutral-point-of-view standard and the three-revert rule. Furthermore, you're causing supporters of the site to look bad by association: it causes it to seem as if you'd rather censor criticism than answer it. Shimeru 02:55, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Stop that right now please

We don't want that in our article, and if I have to I'll either a) lock the page, or b) block you from editing. Please feel free to edit the article in other ways, however please write from a neutral point of view. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:32, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry but I firmly disagree

You have not provided neutral points of view to your edits, and have not researched any of the facts you are choosing to remove. You placed material in dispute without offering reasons for disputing it (Even our detractors acknowledge our conviction record, what do you object to? Who knows, you never put your viewpoint out there, you simply are trying to impose a particular POV by removing content). I will leave the article alone for the time being, only because I am in the process of following Wikipedia guidelines regarding consulting aid and following Arbitration Committee rules.

Wikipedia's method for settling disputes is more properly placed in offering ways to resolve the issue while allowing the growth and development of the article. So, I offered one, and it was shot out of the waters for not sounding "encyclopediac" enough. You have not provided a better solution and I do not consider your intervention wanted or helpful.

Please feel free to contact me anytime regarding misconceptions or facts about Perverted-Justice.com. AIM: PhoebusApolloX Yahoo: phoebus_apollo1 MSN: phoebusapollox@hotmail.com

Otherwise I will feel free to air my opinion and feel there is no "POV" I have added to the article unjustly. If you disagree, stop trying the enforcement method, and actually present reasons as to why you do.

If you can suggest reasons or causes for your changes or proposed changes, present them. Don't just use enforcement policy as the logic (or lack thereof) for your changes. You should properly justify WHAT is adding "POV" and WHAT would be "NPOV". I have done this in all my participation in this article, you have not, and I would request that you start. Otherwise I have to feel like you are being insincere about wanting to fix the actual article.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/7/2E/User_talk%7E67.169.194.181.html"