Content deleted Content added
Flyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs) →Feminism article: Eh... |
|||
Line 867: | Line 867: | ||
:::::Finally: {{User|Flyer22}} on your use of [[WP:VALID]] it is clear that the source of our disagreement comes from our relative **opinions* and **perceptions** of the relative size, opinions, makeup and character of the "mens movement" relative to the women's movement, to the point where you are happy to treat it as a fringe belief when it is not. Currently this article heavily sources from feminist critiques to create the impression that [[WP:VALID]] compels this article to take a negative or critical stance in tone within the article about the men's movement. I would argue this tone is truly rooted in [[WP:CLAIM]] & [[WP:ALLEGED]] type biases due to academic disagreements by the parties about how to approach the movement's validity. Sources on the [[men's rights movement]] should be treated the same way sources on pro-sex feminism and anti-sex feminism are -- as ideological positions treated with balance in respect to their use of sources. Currently the article is skewed by its use of sources primarily due to the excessive attention one side of this academic position has given this article over the other. However, appropriate sources do exist (such as from Warren Farrell) to provide a more balanced NPOV of the mens rights movement than is given here, so that it can be accuratetly described "as they say it is" with fair consideration given to critiques without giving criticisms [[WP:UNDUE]] (afterall criticisms at a minimum should never be more than half of an article, according to the Proportionality guidelines of [[WP:CRIT]] -- and the [[men's rights movement]] article is dangerously close to exceeding that) [[User:Spudst3r|Spudst3r]] ([[User talk:Spudst3r|talk]]) 23:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
:::::Finally: {{User|Flyer22}} on your use of [[WP:VALID]] it is clear that the source of our disagreement comes from our relative **opinions* and **perceptions** of the relative size, opinions, makeup and character of the "mens movement" relative to the women's movement, to the point where you are happy to treat it as a fringe belief when it is not. Currently this article heavily sources from feminist critiques to create the impression that [[WP:VALID]] compels this article to take a negative or critical stance in tone within the article about the men's movement. I would argue this tone is truly rooted in [[WP:CLAIM]] & [[WP:ALLEGED]] type biases due to academic disagreements by the parties about how to approach the movement's validity. Sources on the [[men's rights movement]] should be treated the same way sources on pro-sex feminism and anti-sex feminism are -- as ideological positions treated with balance in respect to their use of sources. Currently the article is skewed by its use of sources primarily due to the excessive attention one side of this academic position has given this article over the other. However, appropriate sources do exist (such as from Warren Farrell) to provide a more balanced NPOV of the mens rights movement than is given here, so that it can be accuratetly described "as they say it is" with fair consideration given to critiques without giving criticisms [[WP:UNDUE]] (afterall criticisms at a minimum should never be more than half of an article, according to the Proportionality guidelines of [[WP:CRIT]] -- and the [[men's rights movement]] article is dangerously close to exceeding that) [[User:Spudst3r|Spudst3r]] ([[User talk:Spudst3r|talk]]) 23:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
::::::Why are you focusing so much on the WP:Sockpuppet aspect? I mentioned WP:Meatpuppet as well. And look, you two even show back up at the same time, or relatively the same time, as seen [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Flyer22&diff=prev&oldid=646566653 here] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Binksternet&diff=646566668&oldid=646560621 here]; same exact time. Without reading much of your "23:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)" comment (I'll read it later), I state that your comments are wasted on me. A Wikipedia editor who misuses Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, WP:Neutral (which WP:Due weight is a part of) especially in this case, and shows no sign of wanting to use them correctly, is an editor I have no interest in talking to. And in the future, you might want to consider someone who is dumb enough not to spot editors who are clearly related. [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] ([[User talk:Flyer22|talk]]) 23:13, 10 February 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Editing Mercedes W204 == |
== Editing Mercedes W204 == |