User talk:Bill23rdpower

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! . Regarding your edits to Bill Janklow, it is normal to explain when removing large amounts of information. I reverted some of that, and invite you to discuss on the article talk page if you think an entire paragraph should be deleted before doing so. Regards. Jonathunder 19:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

My changes are accurate and foot-noted.
My changes are accurate and footnoted and I removed the quotations and extraneous material that have no business in an encyclopedia article.

Bill23rdpower 19:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Bill23rdPower

WHAT IS WRONG HERE?
Why do you keep inserting those materials that have nothing to do with the case in the Bill Janklow article? Public statements are not admissible into evidence, and a federal tort claims action has nothing to do with a criminal conviction. You must have written this originally is all I can figure. If so, please take off the NPOV badge when you compare that language to my neutral, dispassionate prose. The returned language is certainly is NOT encyclopedia material.

Bill23rdpower 21:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Negative facts about the man may be as relevant to the article as favorable facts. It is certainly is a fact that Bill Janklow was convicted numerous times of speeding and other driving violations and that he even boasted he ignored speed limits and that these became more notable facts when his driving killed a man. That this was not admitted as evidence in court does not mean it must be left out of the article: Wikipedia is not a case, it is an encyclopedia.
 * Your edits seem to have the effect of whitewashing away many unpleasant things about this figure. I didn't put those in, originally, but I do object to an attempt to take all negative facts out. Jonathunder 22:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

=I call for review=

I am sorry but I have had illnesses in my family and have been out of commission. I call for a review on this dispute. Your political statements have nothing to do with the case, and only legal evidence admitted in court should be in that part of the article. If you want to make a secion about "criticisms of Janklow" or such go ahead. That is appropriate in the article but not muddied up in the court case. Mixing political charges in the court case is purely wrong. My revision is factual and footnoted.

I shall reinstate my revision, after a few days if I hear nothing further.

Bill23rdpower 17:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Bill23rdpower

The other revisions are anonymous. Mine are factual and foot-noted. Eliminate the other revision that is biased and not neutral.

Bill23rdpower

WHERE IS THE AUTHORITY FOR THIS?
I removed the hand. Where is the authority for its insertion? Anyone can copy a hand and put it in.

Bill23rdpower

I also removed the 3rr. It was placed in anonymously. Anyone can put that in.

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)