Storm Rider (talk | contribs) Dispute resolution and 3RR rules |
Gary Lorentzen (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
If any editor reverts an article three times in one day, that editor may be blocked by an administrator. See [[WP:3RR]]. |
If any editor reverts an article three times in one day, that editor may be blocked by an administrator. See [[WP:3RR]]. |
||
A.J.A. is a bright individual, but s/he is a difficult editor and finds it very difficult to accept that others may have a different set of beliefs; it would seem virtually impossible for him/her to accept different beliefs as being valid. You might also want to appeal to mediation. See [[WP:DR]]. Good luck. [[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 05:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC) |
A.J.A. is a bright individual, but s/he is a difficult editor and finds it very difficult to accept that others may have a different set of beliefs; it would seem virtually impossible for him/her to accept different beliefs as being valid. You might also want to appeal to mediation. See [[WP:DR]]. Good luck. [[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 05:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC) |
||
I'm not concerned about A.J.A.'s socalled beliefs or his/her intelligence. I'm concerned about fairness and intellectual honesty. I have a lawyer looking into this nefarious form of censorship practiced here on Wikipedia and especially by A.J.A. to determine whether the editing practices are censorship. If h/she insists on censoring objective, factual information for religious or ideological reasons, there will be repercussions. I will go through the process that Wikipedia has laid out, but if A.J.A. 'wins', as h/she appears to do again and again with information h/she doesn't like (there's a litany of complaints about this person), there are ways to remedy the problem. [[User:Gary Lorentzen|Gary Lorentzen]] |
Revision as of 12:23, 3 October 2006
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. You are, however, encouraged to add appropriate content to the encyclopedia. If you feel the material in question should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. A.J.A. 15:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
A.J.A., how does one then go about describing the college or any college or anything? If anything anyone says is 'advertising' to you, then would you please advise me as to how to word a history and description of the college so that you don't keep deleting it? I didn't write an advertisement. It was just the facts. The opinions expressed under criticism and controversy were just that, opinions. I've read the wikipedia pages you suggested, and it is not enlightening as to why my description and history of the college can't be used. If I remove the "...students are challenged to..." statement, will it meet your approval? I will keep posting until your aggressive, prejudiced and rude approach to this is resolved. gary lorentzen
Second Warning
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. A.J.A. 05:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
3 Revert Rule
If any editor reverts an article three times in one day, that editor may be blocked by an administrator. See WP:3RR. A.J.A. is a bright individual, but s/he is a difficult editor and finds it very difficult to accept that others may have a different set of beliefs; it would seem virtually impossible for him/her to accept different beliefs as being valid. You might also want to appeal to mediation. See WP:DR. Good luck. Storm Rider (talk) 05:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not concerned about A.J.A.'s socalled beliefs or his/her intelligence. I'm concerned about fairness and intellectual honesty. I have a lawyer looking into this nefarious form of censorship practiced here on Wikipedia and especially by A.J.A. to determine whether the editing practices are censorship. If h/she insists on censoring objective, factual information for religious or ideological reasons, there will be repercussions. I will go through the process that Wikipedia has laid out, but if A.J.A. 'wins', as h/she appears to do again and again with information h/she doesn't like (there's a litany of complaints about this person), there are ways to remedy the problem. Gary Lorentzen