User talk:Anima1111


 * }

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Lolita (orca) has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQcy_bgzZZg&feature=player_embedded. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

On Lolita
For a long time, this article was a mess, as 'free Lolita' and 'Lolita is happy in captivity' people added information promoting their own opinion. Now, the article is just the minimum information available from reasonably reliable sources. If you want to help, you can help by finding other reliable sources that have written about Lolita- but not by adding links to 'Free Lolita' sites or public relations articles. You are not the first person to try to add these links, and they aren't what Wikipedia needs, but you're entirely welcome at Wikipedia- not just to write about this subject, but to make the encyclopedia better in as many ways as you can. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:52, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

There must be a place for both sides vs one
Are you a Wiki official admin? I'd love to know more about your affiliation with Wiki and your power over the orca information on Wiki. I've seen what is strictly opinion on many Wiki pages. The info I've attempted to post is fact, whether it's from Orcanetwork defending whale's natural habitats based on legitimate whale research or not, getting facts other than corporate propaganda out there is the only way the truth will be known. For too long, as with Sea World, people have been force fed only one side of this discriminatory, slavery-like situation. Does this mean that Wiki must also remove all pro-gay info and leave only anti-gay info and links? All pro-life vs pro-choice and only show the most popular side? Is there not one single link on Wiki that's not from a scientific journal? Fact is, Lolita/Tokitae was taken from the wild - which is illegal now. I posted only fact - nothing like "I just want her free." Illegal and cruel acts eventually come to light; like slavery, child abuse, torture, animal abuse like dogfighting, etc, this is no different, but only can come to light by putting the truth out for the public to see. By only allowing the MSQ 'advertisement' on this page it seems awfully one-sidedwith one small reference to the movie about Lolita. At least should say that Lolita came from PNW where her family still resides, etc. There is controversy - it should not be stifled or censored. I do not see how MSQ info stands on more solid ground as a reference than Orca Network's research - they are a for-profit venture who benefits from no Lolita truth in the public eye - right now this page serves them only and nothing of the natural truth that is not-for-profit. In my view, that's the greatest service Wikipedia or any public information venue can offer. The truth. Not more corporate belief systems. This article needs balance. How does this article serve anyone in its current state? Does it help the world? Anima1111 (talk) 05:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, why are all of my external links being removed? Center for Whale Research is the official group tracking the L-pod of Southern Resident orcas - Lolita's family. For this, at the very least, I will need justification. That meets and exceeds all of Wiki's rules and requirements. Anima1111 (talk) 05:50, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I am a Wikipedia administrator, but I'm not acting in that capacity right now- just as a fellow editor. If you are at Wikipedia for the purpose of adding your strong opinions to the encyclopedia, you should review our neutral point of view policy- if this is a subject on which you simply can't be neutral, then it might be better if you edit in areas where you don't have such strong opinions.  I am able to edit neutrally in this area- I stumbled upon this article and the edit-war over it purely by chance, and don't have strong feelings about the subject.  It's perfectly reasonable to write about the controversy- has it been written about in any reliable sources, like newspapers and magazines?  We're looking for published sources that don't already have a position on the issue, and could write neutrally about it.  I looked but couldn't find any such sources- it seems like, although the pro-release and pro-captivity folks both care deeply and have written on the subject, very few people who aren't directly involved in the question have written about it.  Right now, the article says simply the bare facts: Lolita is an orca, who is housed in Miami, and was the subject of a film- because that's all I was able to confirm in independent sources.  I wasn't able to find any independent sources discussing where she came from, or what her life is like at the aquarium, so I cut those parts out.  I'd love for us to expand the article, but those independent sources really are essential.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If there's a link in that cluster of links you were adding that does meet the external links guidelines, feel free to restore that link- it's entirely possible that I missed one. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Notice in the edit history that last night, when I checked in on the article, I also removed language about how popular and happy Lolita is, added by someone with a different opinion than yours. I'm not on any side, other than the side of verifiable facts. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:03, 26 August 2010 (UTC)