User talk:70.48.241.41

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Pecher Talk 22:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Huh? Can you specify exactly what you are referring to? Please note that I was following the recommendation made here: Talk:Martin_Kramer#Is_Martin_Kramer_link_spamming_Wikipedia.3F -- a discussion you were a participant in. Thanks. --70.48.241.41 22:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Please don't delete any more links to scholarly articles. I have restored the ones I've seen so far. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi SM, can you please read Talk:Martin_Kramer#Is_Martin_Kramer_link_spamming_Wikipedia.3F. I brought up the matter with the vandalism unit and it was agree that it was link spam and that I can go ahead and remove it. Martin Kramer has since admitted that he was behind the mass additions. If you disagree that is a different matter. Thx. --70.48.241.41 00:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
It wasn't "agreed." One person agreed and one did not. In any event, this is someone with a PhD in Near Eastern Studies writing about issues that directly involve that area, so his work counts as excellent source material for Wikipedia, and there's therefore no reason to delete it. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, we need to take this to mediation. I strongly feel that his mass additions were both significant POV and it drives traffic to his personal website. This doesn't seem right and it would encourage other scholars of all sorts to do the same thing. --70.48.241.41 00:25, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
If other scholars were to get involved with Wikipedia and help us to find good articles in relevant areas, we'd be a better encyclopedia. I think what you don't like is his POV, which makes your mass deletions very close to vandalism, in my view. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I sense this discussion is deteriorating. Let's take this to mediation. --70.48.241.41 00:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Be careful. You've started to follow and revert my edits, which coming so close on the heels of my having warned you for edits that were arguably vandalism, counts as disruption, and you could be blocked for it. I strongly advise you to forget your vendetta against Kramer, and don't start one against me. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
70.48.241.41, your edits are POV vandalism. Please stop vandalizing wikipedia.Timothy Usher 08:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Please see Talk:Martin Kramer for my follow up comment. Apologies for confusing you, I certainly don't think you can be blamed for following the advice I gave (however now that advice has changed, please do not continue removing the links). Petros471 10:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)