| Revision as of 23:56, 8 August 2010 view sourcePhoenixrod (talk | contribs)9,182 edits →Civility: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:54, 10 August 2010 view source Republic of Texas (talk | contribs)242 edits →CivilityNext edit → | ||
| Line 124: | Line 124: | ||
| I realize that we have disagreed previously at ], but I am sad to see that you have not taken to heart the advice of other editors. What can we do to help you understand Misplaced Pages better? You seem like an intelligent person who could become a productive editor. I'd like to see that happen. -] (]) 23:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC) | I realize that we have disagreed previously at ], but I am sad to see that you have not taken to heart the advice of other editors. What can we do to help you understand Misplaced Pages better? You seem like an intelligent person who could become a productive editor. I'd like to see that happen. -] (]) 23:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :hi! Actually I had no recollection of the talk on Erin Andrews because I had forgotten the issue and moved on. When I saw that a whole section of an article was removed I assumed that someone was just vandalizing stuff - not you in particular, but just some random person, as I failed to associate your name with the Erin Andrews talk. The fact that false anti-pornography movements exist is, I believe, a significant issue. This is similar to ] operations conducted by governments / military, and political groups. (Check out the link!) People do those things to try to discredit an organization or movement. The example that I used - and cited - was the best example that I could find that was well documented and well sourced. The false anti-porn group tried to use the example of diminishing property values as a reason to run those 2 people out of the neighborhood. The link I provided to the property tax office proves that this is not the case, that property values actually increased - and increased greatly, and that the recent reduction in property values was simply the result of the downturn in the housing market as a whole, not something that was the fault of these two people moving into the neighborhood and making porn in their house. Since I cannot use 'original research' I had to provide links to the relevant newspaper articles and tax records to prove this up. | |||
| :Regarding the so-called threats, the context of that statement was entirely different than this matter. It was the result of the possible discovery that - several years ago - these people (and others) were purposefully trying to scrub Misplaced Pages of any reference to these two people. Had the 'threat' been followed through, it would have (as stated) taken place on file sharing sites such as The Pirate Bay, et al., in which ALL of their information would have been released in a comprehensive and complete form. (All of said information is already publically available online; it is just scattered about in different places.) In any event, that matter has nothing to do with this new article. | |||
| :If you can come up with a better example of a false flag operation in the anti-pornography movement, by all means, list it. But this was the best documented - and sourced - example that I could find. It doesn't do any good to talk about false flag operations in the anti-pornography movement if you cannot provide actual examples of such a thing. ] (]) 17:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:54, 10 August 2010
| This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Republic_of_Texas. |
Attention:
This IP address is registered to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, and may be shared by multiple users in the United States military. Because the organization uses proxy servers or firewalls, this IP address may in fact represent many users at many physical computers.
For this reason, a message intended for one person may be received by another and a block shared by many.Caution should be used when blocking this IP or reverting its contributions without checking - if a block is needed, administrators should consider using a soft block with the template {{anonblock|optional comment}} as the block reason.
| Note: In the event of vandalism from this address, abuse reports may be sent to your network administrator for further investigation. |
IT staff who want to monitor vandalism from this IP address can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
About Me
I'm 44 years old and work for the U.S. Government in law enfrocement. I am also in the U.S. Miltary. I am a Lieutenant Colonel and a military police officer in the U.S. Army. I often times find that I am the senior U.S. law enforcement official in many regions of the world. The U.S. Army and the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command has world wide jurisdiction - every country, every person. If you are doing something that could negatively affect the United States of America or any one of its citizens, you are probably already on our radar. We might not get to you right away, but get to you we will. Now, that being said, I am a HUGE believer in civil liberties and individual rights. I hate the USAPATRIOT Act and I hate NSL letters. I think that EVERYBODY - and I do mean EVERYBODY (except for the crazy people and drunks) should be allowed to own and carry the firearm of their choice without the need to get any kind of state license or paperwork.
Just think of this for a moment. Think of all the shit that you see in your city. All the rude behavior, people being jerks, disresptful crap. All of that shit. Now think of a city in which everyone has the ability to carry a gun at will in any location. Are you going to drive recklessly and cut people off in traffic just because your 'running late?' Are you going to cut in line for movie tickets? Are you going to act like an asshole and treat everyone around you like shit?
I think not.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein
What I think Misplaced Pages is about
A 2008 United Nations University survey of 130,000 Misplaced Pages users exposes a surprising profile: the average age of a contributor is 26.8 years (10 years younger than the average age of the general population in ‘more developed’ countries), 87% are male, and at least 46% are not university educated. Even with this relatively young age and education profile, 70-90% of contributors self-identify as “experts”.http://blog.wikimedia.org/2009/first-preliminary-results-from-unu-merit-survey-of-wikipedia-readers-and-contributors-available/ Since I try to view the articles as they would be seen by someone NOT a part of this demographic, I try to include information relevant to them. If these non-demographic members are searching for, say, Erin Andrews, why do you think that is? They don't care about her sportscasting "career" or that she once worked for "the Sunshine Network." They want to know what's up with the naked tapes, and the who, what, when, where, why & how of the matter.
We have got to remember - the people who edit Misplaced Pages are NOT the people who use Misplaced Pages. And if we wish to remain relevant and interesting, we must keep the non-user demographic in mind. Republic of Texas (talk) 15:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Wifey's World
I've reverted you addition of their real names - see the article's Talk page here for why not. Tabercil (talk) 05:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
- okay, I read that stuff. But to my analysis it seems to be nothing more than an 'argument' amongst sockpuppets on behalf of Kevin & Sandra Otterson. These people have put themselves out into the public eye. Their full names, dates of birth, current home address, and social security numbers are all out there on the internets. It is a famous website and I see nothing wrong with putting names to the faces involves. One would guess that if they didn't want to be personally identified then they probably should not have put naked pictures of themselves on the internet for all the world to see - including neighbors, co-workers, family, and friends. (And God Almight would I hate to be one of their children!)Republic of Texas (talk) 14:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- That doesn't matter - if they do not wish to have their names on Misplaced Pages, we have to try and honour their request. This is from WP:BLP: "Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. " See the Flower Tucci article history for a recent example of this principle being applied to an article. Since there's just one reliable source so far for the names of the people behind Wifey's World and it hasn't been publicized further than that, I don't see how we can add it. Tabercil (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- How do you know that they do not wish to have their names on wikipedia? Have they sent a letter or something? I am not trying to be funny here, it is a serious question. Unless someone has proof that this is their wishes, it sounds like more of an assumption to me - and assumptions have no role in an encyclopedia, in my opinion. In addition, I do not see how such a thing can be optional. I am sure that there are a lot of people who have articles about them here who wished to have them removed, too. But personal desires play no role in an encyclopedia, as far as I can see. Regarding you claim of 'one reliable source', I don't see what that has to do with anything. The realibility of the source is the issue. And just because it is not constantly republished over and over should make no difference. I haven't seen too many news articles about Rudolf Hess lately. But he still gets an article here.
- The fact that they might not want their names here is a 'so what' issue to me. If you don't want people to know who you are you probably shouldn't be posting naked pictures of yourselves on the internet for all the world to see. I am going to read those links that you put here. But, really, all of their personal info is already out there anyways.Republic of Texas (talk) 19:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I've reverted your edit on Talk:Wifey's World and re-removed the statement you left on the webpage about their real names on WP:CIV grounds. Also, take a look at WP:BLP, which is the policy which is applicable in this circumstance. Tabercil (talk) 14:31, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I don't see how BLP is applicable. There is nothing that I could find within BLP that says that you are not allowed to reveal the names of people. Why are you trying so hard to keep these peoples' names off Misplaced Pages? I do not understand. Republic of Texas (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- BLP is clear in that it says we have to respect their privacy - if they don't want their name on the article, we pretty much have to pull it off. That's non-negotiable and thus the Flower Tucci edit I mentioned above. Now, on reviewing back, I don't see anything to indicate that the original people wanting the name removed were indeed the subjects of the article, and I don't remember any communication off-wiki on this particular article. So for now, I'll allow the names to stand. Tabercil (talk) 22:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Welcome
|
I've reverted your edit on Talk:Wifey's World and re-removed the statement you left on the webpage about their real names on WP:CIV grounds. Also, take a look at WP:BLP, which is the policy which is applicable in this circumstance. Tabercil (talk) 14:31, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Civility
Please do not call other editors "vandals" for removing questionable content, as you did here. It is a violation of the civility policy, and if you keep it up may earn you a block. For more, see the policy on vandalism, especially what is not vandalism. Also, please read up on assuming good faith. I hope those policies will make clear to you why it's a bad idea to call other editors vandals for disagreeing with you.
I explained when removing your addition that it seems to be a violation of WP:UNDUE as well as a possible WP:BLP violation. You have responded to neither claim. The latter (BLP) is particularly important on Misplaced Pages -- see, for example the Siegenthaler controversy and its real-world consequences. Your edit to Anti-pornography movement in the United States appears to be a direct result of your threats (reverted by multiple others) in this edit. There is absolutely no reason to publish such detailed information about barely-notable people, especially when you have an avowed quest to cast aspersions on them. Let me repeat: There is no call for doing this on Misplaced Pages.
I realize that we have disagreed previously at Talk:Erin Andrews, but I am sad to see that you have not taken to heart the advice of other editors. What can we do to help you understand Misplaced Pages better? You seem like an intelligent person who could become a productive editor. I'd like to see that happen. -Phoenixrod (talk) 23:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- hi! Actually I had no recollection of the talk on Erin Andrews because I had forgotten the issue and moved on. When I saw that a whole section of an article was removed I assumed that someone was just vandalizing stuff - not you in particular, but just some random person, as I failed to associate your name with the Erin Andrews talk. The fact that false anti-pornography movements exist is, I believe, a significant issue. This is similar to 'false-flag' operations conducted by governments / military, and political groups. (Check out the link!) People do those things to try to discredit an organization or movement. The example that I used - and cited - was the best example that I could find that was well documented and well sourced. The false anti-porn group tried to use the example of diminishing property values as a reason to run those 2 people out of the neighborhood. The link I provided to the property tax office proves that this is not the case, that property values actually increased - and increased greatly, and that the recent reduction in property values was simply the result of the downturn in the housing market as a whole, not something that was the fault of these two people moving into the neighborhood and making porn in their house. Since I cannot use 'original research' I had to provide links to the relevant newspaper articles and tax records to prove this up.
- Regarding the so-called threats, the context of that statement was entirely different than this matter. It was the result of the possible discovery that - several years ago - these people (and others) were purposefully trying to scrub Misplaced Pages of any reference to these two people. Had the 'threat' been followed through, it would have (as stated) taken place on file sharing sites such as The Pirate Bay, et al., in which ALL of their information would have been released in a comprehensive and complete form. (All of said information is already publically available online; it is just scattered about in different places.) In any event, that matter has nothing to do with this new article.
- If you can come up with a better example of a false flag operation in the anti-pornography movement, by all means, list it. But this was the best documented - and sourced - example that I could find. It doesn't do any good to talk about false flag operations in the anti-pornography movement if you cannot provide actual examples of such a thing. Republic of Texas (talk) 17:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)