User talk:Advanced research

Undefeatable
Hi Research, I need to talk to you about your edits to this article. Your revision gives undue weight to a minor cast/crew member in the lead paragraph, which is a neutral point of view issue. You are also engaging in a revert war whilst not responding to the discussion on the talk page: the concensus is that the material you are adding should be left out. Care to respond? Marasmusine (talk) 10:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC) I have responded on the talk page--many times. The individual who continued to revert my contribution to Undefeatable, has never acknowledged the fact that he was wrong about third-party verification. If he can not acknowledge the fact that he was wrong about third-party verification, then there seems to be no reason to continue addressing the issue at all. None of what he had indicated made any sense. He remains in denial about his assertion and notion that he could not find any third-party verification. He is inane if he truly wishes for me or any other rational person to believe that when he typed C. Monique Berry's name into Google that he could not find any third-party verification. I do not take kindly to delusional acting, irate individuals. Furthermore, I have more than made my case. In fact, I wrote extensively about this on the talk page. Have you not read my previous talk page notes about the movie Undefeatable? finis coronat opus (talk) 22:49, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, your statement is that I am "not responding to the discussion." Really? Really? Really? Your claim is that I have NOT been replying to the discussion? Then how do you explain this the FACT THAT I HAVE CLEARLY BEEN RESPONDING TO THE DISCUSSION AND THAT I HAVE A TIME STAMP PROVIDING EVIDENCE OF SUCH? CAN YOU NOT SEE WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN?

NOW, ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE THE SAME CLAIM THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN RESPONDING TO THE DISCUSSION?

BELOW IS WHAT I WROTE PRIOR TO YOUR REMARK AND COMMENT IN THAT YOU HAVE CLEARLY MADE THE CLAIM THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN RESPONDING WHEN I CLEARLY HAVE BEEN RESPONDING THIS ENTIRE TIME.

THIS IS WHAT I WROTE PRIOR TO YOUR ASININE AND FALSE COMMENT:

C. Monique Berry is a verified source. She has the role of first-assistant director and location manager for the movie Undefeatable. Check IMDB--Internet Movie Database.

Advanced researchfinis coronat opus (talk) 01:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how she is in any way worthy of mention - Her main discernible role in the movie is playing a background character. It would be different if she was a very popular politician, but I can't find any reliable third-party coverage that establish her notability. Another way of looking at it is - If she was popular enough, it wouldn't be important to describe in such details who she is. Hope this helps. Eik Corell (talk) 02:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

The notion that you cannot find any third-party coverage that establishes C. Monique Berry is absolutely absurd and preposterous. I have read your other posts regarding people who you have tried to belittle over time. Also, it appears as if you are primarily a video game reviewer. FYI, C. Monique Berry ran for the 41st District House of Delegates in the States of Virginia during an important political campaign that was being monitored by individuals and organizations throughout North America--not just by persons in the State of Virginia. The past elections were incredibly important to not only the State of Virginia, but also to outside individuals and organizations in that the former Democratic governor was succeeded by a Republican candidate. C. Monique Berry's run for office prevented a major Republican opponent from being elected in her district, which helped shift the overall power balance in the State of Virginia back to the Democrats. As a result of Ms. Berry's efforts, she was contacted by Democratic incumbent Dave Marsden (D-Burke 37 District VA Special Elections) who personally asked C. Monique Berry to endorse him for his election campaign to the U.S. Senate.

Your motives and speedy removal of Ms. Berry's inclusion in the Wikipedia page for the movie Undefeatable for which C. Monique Berry clearly has THREE ROLES according to the popular and quite accurate Internet Movie Database (IMDB), are highly questionable and highly suspicious.

Ms. Berry had an integral role in the making of the movie Undefeatable. For you to deny these facts, let alone claim that you could not/cannot find any third-party verification of C. Monique Berry, brings into question your journalistic integrity and scruples. Furthermore, Google is the most popular Web site on the planet. A quick search of "C. Monique Berry" easily reveals that she is CLEARLY THIRD-PARTY VERIFIED, as she appeared in the U.S. Capital Region’s Washington Post Newspaper, the State of Virginia’s Connections Newspaper, the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) for the DMV (District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia) among other media and that she currently has an online tv show http://moniqueberry.webs.com/cmoniqueberrytvshow.htm

Again, C. Monique Berry has three roles in the movie Undefeatable: She has the role of first-assistant director and location manager for the movie, AS WELL AS played victim #1. You obviously and clearly failed to acknowledge these facts.

FACTS:

Ms. Berry had an integral role in the making of the movie Undefeatable. C. Monique Berry has THREE ROLES in the movie Undefeatable C. Monique Berry was the FIRST ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ...and... location manager for the movie...and...female victim #1 C. Monique Berry is CLEARLY THIRD-PARTY VERIFIED C. Monique Berry is ABSOLUTELY a notable politician, C. Monique Berry is OBVIOUSLY an actress, and integral team player in the movie C. Monique Berry is someone who MORE THAN DESERVES INCLUSION HERE IN THE Undefeatable Wikipedia page

For you, Eik Corell, to attempt to remove C. Monique Berry's information from the Undefeatable Wikipedia page is total nonsense and clearly demonstrates not not only your hasty and haphazard approach to 21st century Internet etiquette, but also your total lack of sincerity as the latter pertains to proper and thorough scholarly standards of research and investigation.

finis coronat opus (talk) 18:56, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

First off, please assume good faith, there's no need to take the tone you've taken. Many small-time politicians, senators and other political figures appear in a few publications, this, four articles however do establish their notability. And I'm having trouble finding these articles that have covered her. All I'm seeing are websites containing voter tallies where her votes are listed, or websites that just contain lists of Virginia politicians. I urge you to present those articles you feel establish her notability here. The fact that she has a personal website doesn't do it - Most politicians do, small or big. So please, reliable, third-party coverage. The JCRC article you mentioned I have found, and this in no way establishes notability, because that is a questionaire that has been sent to numerous politicians. A search on the text reveals another such article with the same questions addressed to another politican. I am having a hard to finding any of the stuff you cite - It's burried among results of other people. That is usually a bad sign. Eik Corell (talk) 22:24, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I posted a response on the article talk page. Elk Corell, you are right to try to keep the discussion on the article talk page, that is where it belongs. I suggest you can just delete this from your talk page and future such posts without response. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC) Really? Are you really having a difficult time finding information to verify C. Monique Berry? I do not believe this is true. Erstwhile, you made mention of someone's tone. Please, spare me the rhetoric. C. Monique Berry has 3 roles in the movie. Having 3 roles in a movie is not minor. She was also the first-assistant director mind you. What you ought to do is go back and read what I wrote with regard to my contention that having 3 roles in a movie is not minor especially given that one of the roles is first-assistant director. Furthermore, your claim that there is consensus about what you have conceded is absolutely silly. You cannot convince me that having 3 roles in this movie Undefeatable is not significant enough to warrant inclusion in the Wikipedia article. C. Monique Berry's roles were not all insignificant or minor for that matter. Also, you cannot convince me that C. Monique Berry's political activities are minor either. Once again, it appears as if you have not truly accepted these facts. Also, given that you are so adamant about constantly removing the credit given to C. Monique Berry in the Wikipedia article, suggests that you have some third-party interest in mind and that you are very much against the actor/location manager/first-assistant director. I cannot imagine that you are a true authority on the film, nor is it my inclination that you have a vested interest in history or truth. It appears as if your primary activity is to disregard various, important contributions to Wikipedia. BTW, here is more info that I found on C. Monique Berry that you seem to have a difficult time finding:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/23/AR2009102303810.html

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=333115&paper=63&cat=109

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2009/elections/va/

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:7WwYPb3pJPQJ:www.facebook.com/pages/Delegate-Dave-Marsden/54577028471+c.+monique+berry+washington+post&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://www.theamericanconservatives.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=909&Itemid=72

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:7TcDZSLX1UMJ:www.fairfaxtimes.com/cms/story.php%3Fid%3D527+c.+monique+berry+washington+post&cd=11&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

I can keep going. The notion that you were only able to find one publication with her name in it related to her campaign is preposterous. C. Monique Berry is clearly third-party verified. As I said above, "I cannot imagine that you are a true authority on the film, nor is my inclination that you have a vested interest in history or truth. It appears as if your primary activity is to disregard various, important contributions to Wikipedia."

You are clearly in denial about the truth here. You have demonstrated on multiple occasions that you have sidestepped reality and that you have no interest in truth. 3 roles in a movie does NOT equate to a minor role not worthy of inclusion in the Wikipedia article.

finis coronat opus (talk) 23:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * So, write an article about her, then a sentence about her in the movie article and wikilink to her article. Solved. -- IP69.226.103.13 |  Talk about me.  02:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

AN/I
You're mentioned at AN/I. -- IP69.226.103.13 |  Talk about me.  02:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 04:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 12:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

AONN AfD
Please do not resort to vandalizing other people's comments on the AfD. It will not effect the outcome of the deletion vote; people will notice through the page history that you directly changed other people's comments/votes. Engaging in disruptive behavior will, if anything, make people *less* likely to be won over to your viewpoint, not more likely. Kgorman-ucb (talk) 05:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)