User talk:StephenBengHo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This username was created to impersonate a real person for slanderous purposes by the Australian politics vandal - David Gerard 10:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

In reply to your comments from Talk:Paula Rizzuto...

Thought I put this article up before but I couldn't find it. Why could that be?

The Paula Rizzuto article was deleted as it was created as a page designed to attack its' subject. Whilst the article content seemed legit, the link used as a reference clearly wasn't [1]. See also, Wikipedia:Attack page. -- Longhair 07:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
See above regarding your comments on my talk page. The content was legit. Was the link? -- Longhair 07:48, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
The Paula Rizzuto article was deleted, by myself, as it was created as an article designed to discredit or attack its' subject. Whilst the article content did seem legitimate, Paula isn't overly notable, and the link added to the article by the author, User:Stephenho (which I'm assuming is an account also registered to yourself) was defamatory. -- Longhair 07:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I've requested peer review at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board. Feel free to comment there. -- Longhair 08:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

We've already established linking to the blog referred to above is not in the best interests of WP:NPOV. Please cease adding the link to the Paula Rizzuto article. Future additions will see your username and / or ip addresses blocked from editing. -- Longhair 12:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

What's Ambi's view? How is that relevant anyway? I'm deleting the link as defamatory, not judging it for parody. Give it a rest. Your game was uncovered long before you realised, and the article in question is being watched for sneaky additions like your recent effort. -- Longhair 12:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

It's called judgement. There are some parody sites which a consensus of the relevant editors have deemed appropriate to include, and the Andrew Landeryou link is one example. Your page of primary-school-level fat jokes, however, is not worthy of being labelled parody, let alone being even considered for inclusion in an even remotely serious encylopedia. Ambi 12:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Try looking at the names on the Socialist Left page. You'll notice that all the names are members of either a federal, state or territory parliament, many of whom are particularly well known. You'll also note that there are no municipal-level figures, let alone a failed candidate to local council. Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue for your stalking. Ambi 12:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

Lidia Argondizzo

Have been digging up and around the Lidia article. Do you have any ideas how I can find sources to substantiate its claims. If the references are offline, how do we make sure they are listed to so that they can be verified too. StephenBengHo 13:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

That particular article cites a reference ending in the domain name of vic.gov.au, a far cry and a more credible reference than your own examples. Weakening credibility on other articles won't win you any points around here. -- Longhair 13:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, it was added just moments ago and does not by any means substantiate all the claims in the article especially about her political future although it does prove up quite a few. StephenBengHo 13:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You were warned, but continued violating WP:POINT to the point of disruption. Take some time off, and in the future please make constructive edits. It would probably be better to avoid any of the articles you have edited so far. - Taxman Talk 13:20, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Website...

... I have to say, that this website isn't in fact a parody. It's basically vile. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Landeryou

Of course the Slanderyou website is an attack website on Landeryou, but then Landeryou's website is also an attack website. The first is a necessary antitode to the other. I happen to know that Landeryou regards the whole thing as a joke. In any case I think it is outrageous to say that articles can't link to websites that attack the subject of the aricle. Adam 07:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

"Attack" is one thing. Spewing forth absolute immature crap is quite another. -- Longhair 07:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)