| Revision as of 16:37, 13 August 2010 edit207.118.46.89 (talk) →Re:← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:38, 13 August 2010 edit undoJrtayloriv (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers17,855 edits →Re:Next edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| Thanks. ] (]) 16:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC) | Thanks. ] (]) 16:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
| : I realize ] is making biased and inaccurate edits -- she's been at it for years. The difference is, that Sandy knows how to game the system quite well. She knows that she is being biased, but can get away with it, because she selectively cherry-picks ] (however factually inaccurate, and misleading they may be) to support the point-of-view she is trying to insert into the article. The only way that you can counter this, is by picking other reliable sources to balance out her edits, so that the article remains neutral, and rewrite her additions in neutral language. I have a feeling that eventually she will be topic-banned for causing so much strife there, and preventing progress from being made on the article. For now, however, don't take her violation of Misplaced Pages policy as a free ticket to do it yourself. Try to report everything in neutral language, and back it with reliable sources. -- ] (]) 16: |
: I realize ] is making biased and inaccurate edits -- she's been at it for years. The difference is, that Sandy knows how to game the system quite well. She knows that she is being biased, but can get away with it, because she selectively cherry-picks ] (however factually inaccurate, and misleading they may be) to support the point-of-view she is trying to insert into the article. The only way that you can counter this, is by picking other reliable sources to balance out her edits, so that the article remains neutral, and rewrite her additions in neutral language. I have a feeling that eventually she will be topic-banned for causing so much strife there, and preventing progress from being made on the article. For now, however, don't take her violation of Misplaced Pages policy as a free ticket to do it yourself. Try to report everything in neutral language, and back it with reliable sources. -- ] (]) 16:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 16:38, 13 August 2010
Got something to say? Click here to add a new section.
For old conversations, please see: The Archives
Re:
Thanks for the note. I have indeed read WP:RS and WP:NPOV - I've actually used Misplaced Pages for a little over four years, though I've only now just got the account.
I understand the issues you might have with my edits. However, I'd like you to note that neutrality is not the same as objectivity. While my edits may seem to, in this case, favor the person whose article I'm editing (Hugo Chavez), I consider it merely as correcting certain common misrepresentations. Now, this of course is subject to personal opinions, which is why I've attempted to avoid sensitive issues and focused on logical issues. I can't see, for example, why my removal of "also" in the beginning paragraph would be a problem for you. Here's the original version:
"..promotes..socialism" ; "He is also a critic of neoliberalism."
As you can see, the two statements above are essentially similar; it is debatable whether it is redundant, but what is certain is that "also" has no place in the second sentence, since it has already been implied by the first sentence.
This is just one edit I made out of around twenty changes, some minor and some major. I am willing to accept contentions with some of these edits, but I was quite disappointed to see that you've reverted every single edit of mine without apparent consideration, including many grammatical changes I've made.
I should also note that another editor has made major revisions to the article as we speak, and that the potential issues with these edits far outweigh any issues you might have had with mine. With this consideration, I've proceeded to revert the article to your version, as you should obviously intend to, and hope that we might have a more engaging conversation in the article's talk page.
Thanks. Pkeaton (talk) 16:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- I realize User:SandyGeorgia is making biased and inaccurate edits -- she's been at it for years. The difference is, that Sandy knows how to game the system quite well. She knows that she is being biased, but can get away with it, because she selectively cherry-picks "reliable" sources (however factually inaccurate, and misleading they may be) to support the point-of-view she is trying to insert into the article. The only way that you can counter this, is by picking other reliable sources to balance out her edits, so that the article remains neutral, and rewrite her additions in neutral language. I have a feeling that eventually she will be topic-banned for causing so much strife there, and preventing progress from being made on the article. For now, however, don't take her violation of Misplaced Pages policy as a free ticket to do it yourself. Try to report everything in neutral language, and back it with reliable sources. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 16:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)