Misplaced Pages

User talk:LiberalViews: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:21, 4 November 2007 editMackensen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators125,191 edits Great Irish Famine: re← Previous edit Revision as of 11:29, 4 November 2007 edit undoVintagekits (talk | contribs)22,333 edits Great Irish Famine: welcomeNext edit →
Line 42: Line 42:


::Why yes, of course I share his agenda--that's why I disagree with him on the talk page! Don't be daft. It may be that he's spouting nonsense, but you're engaging in personal attacks. I don't appreciate the implied slander either--in the course of this debate an Irish editor called me a Nazi. Clearly I can't belong to both sides, so one of us is approaching this debate the wrong way. I have to insist on a modicum of civility. You're hardly the only the offender in this regard but your comment struck me as particularly uncalled for. That you assume some kind of political collusion--without a shred of evidence--is equally telling. Please consider you words more carefully in the future. Best, ] ] 02:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC) ::Why yes, of course I share his agenda--that's why I disagree with him on the talk page! Don't be daft. It may be that he's spouting nonsense, but you're engaging in personal attacks. I don't appreciate the implied slander either--in the course of this debate an Irish editor called me a Nazi. Clearly I can't belong to both sides, so one of us is approaching this debate the wrong way. I have to insist on a modicum of civility. You're hardly the only the offender in this regard but your comment struck me as particularly uncalled for. That you assume some kind of political collusion--without a shred of evidence--is equally telling. Please consider you words more carefully in the future. Best, ] ] 02:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

==Feel free you come along and help out here! Choose one articles and help improve that!!==

{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Irish_Republicanism/Template:WPIR}}

Revision as of 11:29, 4 November 2007

Welcome!

Hello, LiberalViews, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Arnoutf 17:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Judge John Deed

Hi, do you have a source for the comparison between Listfield and Arun Sarin that you made in the JJD article? While the info you added is certainly plausible, it's uncited so might get the article failed at WP:GA for being original research. Thanks. Brad 15:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, no. I guess I was drawing the obvious conclusion/comparison. The issue being that it is interesting that the evil deranged genius businessman in the programme just happens to be a foreigner and just by coincidence he is head of the biggest fictional mobile phone company and the head of the real one just also happens to be foreign. Is there a way to say that within Misplaced Pages rules? LiberalViews 17:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Only with a citation I'm afraid. This wouldn't have bothered me as much if not for the fact that I have the article listed at WP:GAC, but as it is, nothing can jeopardise it. I'll leave it commented out rather than deleted just in case something turns up in the future. Brad 18:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

How does it get to be a good article Brad and why is it a good idea to do it? Sorry for the novice question! Thanks. LiberalViews 18:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:WIAGA answers that question; if an article conforms to that list, another editor can list it at Misplaced Pages:Good articles. Basically the article has gone from looking like this in February to how it looks now. Brad 19:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Wow, yes, I see what you mean - quite an improvement! In what ways do you feel it still needs work if at all? LiberalViews 19:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Many areas really. I was going to submit it to Peer review if it passes GA. Brad 19:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

George Galloway

Please explain how, in your judgement, "...although Galloway has always claimed that he was addressing the Iraqi people. In his 2002 visit, as war talk and claims of weapons of mass destruction filled the airwaves, he said "we are determined that we are going to do everything we can to stop this rush over the cliff"" is "commentary and reportage aimed at giving a false impression." Which part are you referring to, and what makes you claim that the editor(s) intended to deceive? DanielM 02:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Poverty in India

Hi LiberalViews, I can't see anything in the article that sources "a veneer of expansionist, "superpower" government priorities". I've started discussion on the talk page in the NCEUS report section. -- SiobhanHansa 14:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

There's nothing listed about the source anyway; it's just a link to a book title on amazon. I think this page needs some work! At the moment it contains equally POV assertions like the anti-British retoric in the development section for example. LiberalViews 16:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Which book is this? I'm not clear where you think this assertion is supported in the main body of the article. I agree there's plenty of stuff on the page that needs cleaning up, but that's not a good reason for introducing more POV. -- SiobhanHansa 21:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Great Irish Famine

Your last comment to Domer48 is a personal attack and does nothing towards improving the article. I would ask that you withdraw that remark, and refrain from making similar remarks in the future. The article is problematic enough without random ad hominems. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 21:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

It's just based on frustration. Clearly you aren't going to do anything about his nonsense and appear to me to be going along with it - do you share the same political agenda? LiberalViews 21:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Why yes, of course I share his agenda--that's why I disagree with him on the talk page! Don't be daft. It may be that he's spouting nonsense, but you're engaging in personal attacks. I don't appreciate the implied slander either--in the course of this debate an Irish editor called me a Nazi. Clearly I can't belong to both sides, so one of us is approaching this debate the wrong way. I have to insist on a modicum of civility. You're hardly the only the offender in this regard but your comment struck me as particularly uncalled for. That you assume some kind of political collusion--without a shred of evidence--is equally telling. Please consider you words more carefully in the future. Best, Mackensen (talk) 02:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Feel free you come along and help out here! Choose one articles and help improve that!!

The Irish Republicanism WikiProject is a collaboration of editors dedicated to improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of Irish republicanism, Irish nationalism, and related organizations, peoples, and other topics.

(For more information on WikiProjects, please see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject and the Guide to WikiProjects).

User talk:LiberalViews: Difference between revisions Add topic