| Revision as of 19:45, 1 July 2007 editBelltoller (talk | contribs)5 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:31, 2 July 2007 edit undoKensingtonBlonde (talk | contribs)186 edits Revert improper use of user page by other userNext edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| Please see ] for information on my efforts there. | Please see ] for information on my efforts there. | ||
| J.M, | |||
| Forgive me if this is not the correct manner in which to send you a message. I am new to this website and am unclear on how to send messages. | |||
| I am writing to express my profound anger and disappointment at your apparent lack of professionalism and integrity on the issue of articles pertaining to politicians. It is quite obvious that this website is leftist, but to edit out facts that paint a positive picture of a politician that you happen to dislike is very troubling and really goes to your integrity as a human being. I recently edited out blatant falsehoods in the Ronald Reagan article. The page is so filled with negative opinion, it was hardly readable to someone like myself who has studied in-depth the life and career of President Reagan. You reverted my edits on the cham basis that it violated the purported "neutral" POV policy of this website. What is truly pathetic is that I edited out the actual opinion and conjecture and replaced said opinions with facts that I backed up with reputable sources. Apparently, your construction of the word "neutral" means liberal. There is simply no other logical explanation. My changes were not biased or over-congratulatory; I used no adjectives; my edits were simply facts and quotes that are easily reviewable by anyone with the will to look for them. There are many falsehoods in that article, but I really do not have the time to discuss them all; I also think it would be rather pointless to do so as you are obviously a person with whom facts matter very little. But in the interest of justifying my harsh tone, here are two examples that I found especially offensive. | |||
| First, let's take the first change which concerns Reagan's apparent lack of understanding on the issue of economics. You purport to support this ridiculous statement by posting a quote from Don Regen, in which he recalls, never discussing economics with President Reagan. Now, I ask you this: how does a lack of communication lead you to conclude he did not understand economics? That is like saying because I never discussed reading with my professors, that that necessarily means I do not know how to read or write. It's a complete farce! So I edited that out with a quote from Dr. Milton Friedman who happened to praise Reagan's understanding of economics and his political will to stick with his policies during the early 80s. Yet, to you, this violates the "neutral" point of view policy? My God man, that is pathetic! What specifically is not neutral about that? Please inform me. It's a simple quote! That Friedman praised Reagan is not opinion or point of view at all! It's a fact backed up with a transcript interview on PBS! To you, however, it is not a neutral statement, but someone concluding Reagan did not understand economics ONLY because he happened to not discuss it with Don Regen necessarily means he did not understand it...To you, this is a completely neutral point of view? hah. | |||
| Let's take the second point: that liberal critics charged that his income tax decrease led in part to the deficits of the 80s. I tried to insert some sanity into this article by showing that tax revenues nearly doubled during the 80s, but that was edited out as well. That is like saying getting a huge raise at work that doubles one's salary led to the person going bankrupt. There is just no logic in the statement at all. Again, these are not opinions; these are facts that happen to disagree with your preconceived world-view. | |||
| My objective was not to remove criticism of President Reagan. My objective was to correct falsehoods and lies about the man. There are many points on which to level legitimate criticism against the President (as there are for all people), but to post lies and illogical statements is very troubling. However, even worse than that, is to leave those statements unmolested when someone points out that they are simply not true. | |||
| You really need to get out and take a break from all of this. Trying to white-wash history due to your apparent hate for President Reagan is not doing anyone any good, least of all, liberals. If you want to honestly debate Reagan, I am all for it! But you need to stop posting lies and conjecture, and then removing any edits that attempt to correct the record. It is dishonest; although I think the word "pathetic" better describes your actions. I do not have the time to get into an editing war with you. Even if I did, sadly, there many more people on this website like you than there are like me. You are dis-serving the human race by playing your little game. Fortunately, to the general public, President Reagan continues to be remembered as one of the most beloved and effective Presidents in the 20th Century, to say nothing of the entire history of the United States. I just wish there could be a forum to have an honest debate of his policies to explain WHY he was so well liked. | |||
| I understand I am being harsh, but your actions are not those of ignorance or negligence. You are deliberately trying to smear President's Reagan's memory and record, and deliberate acts like yours, should and MUST call for the most ardent condemnations from anyone who seeks truth and honesty or has any type of respect for the history of the human civilization. | |||
| So enjoy living in your little bubble. This is a great website, but it will always be held down by its inability to tell a straight story. | |||
Revision as of 16:31, 2 July 2007
| Meta:Babel templates | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Greetings, I am J.M., otherwise known on Wikimedia as "The Kensington Blonde". I am glad to see that you have decided to visit my user page. This page is currently under construction, but I will tell you a little bit about myself and my interests in the meantime. I am a University student, pre-med, to be exact, with aspirations to become a plastic surgeon, and later, a politician. My claim to uniqueness is being the only person besides my mother, who has both the mind of a Social Democrat and the cultural conditioning of an Aristocrat. My interests, both within the English Misplaced Pages and in real life include music, politics, health and exercise, and travel. My first contribution was a minor edit made to Paul Hindemith's composition Der Schwanendreher. My primary concerns regarding Wiki policy include:
Ensuring that NPOV be properly maintained
Ensuring that disruptive users are adequately blocked without expense to legitimate users
Establishing a higher standard for Administrators to conform to
Establishing a higher standard for cited articles to conform to
Ensuring that this wonderful project lasts a lifetime
These, in a nutshell, are issues I plan to take part in regarding policy, with special attention to the largest branch of the Wikimedia project, the English Misplaced Pages. Thank you for looking, and I hope to expand this page very soon!
Please see meta:User:KensingtonBlonde for information on my efforts there.
Categories: