User talk:Coldquip

Trey Gowdy
Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. I wanted to let you know that I reverted your edit to Trey Gowdy. The line you changed was an exact quote and was in quotation marks. That means someone is reporting exactly what was said. You can read it on this website at paragraph 7. Thanks! Hope you enjoy wikipedia. HistoricMN44 (talk) 13:27, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, you cannot make clarifications as to a quoted person's mistake. Find a reference where someone does that. We cannot use your viewpoint or clarification. I am removing it, and would ask that, until you have the aforementioned reference, you not include it again. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:16, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Pardon me, but did you just post anonymously to my user-talk page? If not, disregard the following. If you did so, then allow me to begin by noting that I am not upset at either you or your edits, despite the fact that you think I am slow enough to not know when two "different" people come to me in defense of the same edit. So, nice try, buddy.
 * Wikipedia is not a repository of original thought. That may sound like a lot of words to handle, so allow me to parse it out for you. We don't get to render our opinions in an article, like some people choose to do in a politics forum or FunSubstance comment list. We quote other people. People who are notable enough to be considered as reliable sources of information. To simplify that even further, your opinion doesn't measure up to someone in the public eye. Even more simply, famous people: yes. You: not so much.
 * I am not in Trey Goudy's fan club (I am, however, in the Subway® sandwich club, which is one of the undoubtedly many reasons why I don't edit the Subway article - a guy's got to have morals and standards, yo). If anything, you have to defend the articles of people one would find morally reprehensible more than those of the popular kids, simply because most people think that if you are a dick, you deserve to be slandered and snipe-edited by hairless monkeys with too little sense and too much time on their hands. If I edit out a personal clarification by an editor without notable standing, then I am doing what we as editors are supposed to be doing. I don't owe an explanation for it, apart from citing our policies. You get my explanation for free. So you are welcome. Please send butterscotch and high end booze. :) - Jack Sebastian (talk) 03:49, 29 March 2014 (UTC)