User talk:68.96.76.118

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Mrs. Reagan's article

Hi, the notion of being a great, or among the greatest first ladies is subjective and contrary to an ecyclopedic, objective style of prose. What would be objective would be if you might cite quantifiable things about Mrs. Reagan that she is highly regarded for, perhaps her work fighting drug use, or care for her husband afer his diagnosis, or her work in collecting antiques for the White House. Even writing about her style of entertaining and dress would be appropriate. Good luck. CApitol3 19:56, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I was actually just going to say the same thing. There is an expression used here in Wikipedia, called "peacock" words. There is also the importance of maintaining a neutral point of view (called NPOV). To give you an idea of how important this is, there are people who want to post information on Wikipedia complaining about the so-called Grand Jewish conspiracy and trash like that, A neutral point of view is vital if we want Wikipedia to be a source that everyone can use without concerns that the information is overly biased one way or the other. I hope this explains the idea a bit more. It isn't that we think Nancy Reagan was a bad First Lady, but rather that no one point of view is valid by itself. I particularly think that she (and her husband) were pariahs on the American political landscape, but they both deserve a neutral article, as they are both notable and interesting.Arcayne 03:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Rather than remove the text, ask for it to be cited or removed on the Discussion pageArcayne 16:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I am telling you this as a fellow contributor. If you do not cite your text (and if you have questions about how to do this, please feel free to ask), it will not stay in the article. So far, you have removed text for not having citations, and then have added information without citation, the only difference being that the info you deleted appears to not be complimentary to Nancy, and the info you added appears to compliment her. This brings up issues of NPOV. Discuss your edits on the Discussion page, please.Arcayne 16:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mrs. Reagan's article edits

Hi. When editing text please cite sources, in editing pictures please feel free to add images with an edit summary. If you feel an image should be deleted you stand a far better chance of maintaining a deletion if you discuss it and marshal support on the discussion page. It's great that you admire Mrs. Reagan, and there is room for that as long as it is cited, and as long as you do not delete cited text that is not complimentary. Like any public figure Mrs. Reagan has fans and detractors, the article is not a memorial to her, nor is it a place to besmirch her. You might consider becoming a registered user. Best, CApitol3 18:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could drop me response. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions regarding Nancy Reagan, and you seem to know a lot about her.Arcayne 00:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iran-Contra

The fact that the Reagan library removed all references to the biggest presidential scandal between Watergate and Clinton is certainly revelant (and has been noted by dozens of scholars and commentators), and should be included as a pertinent fact in the wiki description of the museum. From reviewing your other contributions, it appears that you feel the mere mention of Iran-Contra, and it's removal from the library, is somehow embarrassing to Reagan. This isn't a partisan shrine to Reagan. Please stop removing this fact, and please heed the advice above about NPOV.

Info999 03:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] March 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Ronald Reagan, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Morenooso 21:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ronald Reagan article

Hi. We could use your input on a problem we're having with an editor, who's constantly inserting an item into the lead when we've all decided by consensus that it doesn't belong. Please see the Reagan talk page for my suggestion, and please comment appropriately. Thanks. Info999 01:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Utica, New York

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Utica, New York. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. cOrneLlrOckEy 22:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)