User talk:Biker Bernie

Barack Obama
Please don't insert your own opinions into article as it breaches the neutral tone expected in an encyclopedia article. Thanks, --John (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I received a message from you about an edit that I made stating "Barack Obama Please don't insert your own opinions into article as it breaches the neutral tone expected in an encyclopedia article. Thanks, --John (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Biker_Bernie"Personal tools

I am sorry in advance for what can appear to be an attack but I have been through enough similar things not to realize that this is a real perceptive potential. Please use logical arguments and not a "because I said so attitude" when making your debate. All I wanted present was the FACT that even according to wiki under "Mulatto" Barack Hussein Obama II is considered mulatto and that a large number of people consider him such and not African American because he is at best 50% African. The true question here is at what fraction would some one not be considered African American? Obviously not at 50%, what about 25%, 12.5%, 6.25%, 3.125%? Is this not an insult to his European American mother? This is a fundamental problem that is plaguing our history and encyclopedias and their documentation. This is an issue important enough to have standards applied lest no one truly know what anything means or represents. What I edited was not an opinion but a fact even according to wiki so I am some what offended by the implication that was made. If wiki wants to maintain its credibility than it must not misrepresent fact for opinion because then fact many not be politically correct. History and fact has to be presented despite public opinion or fact will be lost because of "hurt" or perceived "hurt" feelings.

In the edit view of the article it states: "He is the List of African-American firsts|first African American PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE OBAMA'S RACE FROM "AFRICAN AMERICAN", per existing consensus." A consensus is nothing more than people agreeing on an opinion yet I am told not to use my own opinions that are in reality fact. So it would seem that wiki breaks its own rules and takes a "do as I say and not as I do" attitude.

Please reconsider my edit for the sake of integrity including if you have a suggestion of how to present it more tactfully if you believe it to be otherwise, I would be more than receptive to any suggestions that will present the whole truth.

Bernie


 * See WP:CONSENSUS, WP:TRUTH and WP:NPOV. --John (talk) 20:31, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of River Road Volunteer Fire Company Incorporated


The article River Road Volunteer Fire Company Incorporated has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Fails WP:NORG. Very close paraphrase and direct copy of: http://www.riverroadvfc.com/

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vrac (talk) 21:09, 17 July 2015 (UTC)