User talk:Coloredhorse

Madness
Welcome to the madhouse; please say hello

Welcome
Hi, Coloredhorse. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  23:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Horse articles
Hi, I have noticed your additions to Andalusian horse and other articles. Please discuss your changes on the talk pages of these articles, as they are controversial and subject to the policies of WP:FRINGE. It is possible your material may be suitable for addition to the articles, but as written is not in conformance with wikipedia standards of Neutral point of view where there are horse breed "politics," it is usual to explain the views of the main parties to the dispute and the readers can evaluate the material for themselves. Montanabw (talk) 00:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I was coming here to post almost exactly the same thing as Montanabw already has, so I'll just say "ditto". The material you're adding is controversial, and many of the "sources" you're adding do not back up your assertions. Please take this to the talk pages of the various articles. After having read the text on your user page, I would also suggest that you read WP's conflict of interest policy. It may be that you would want to edit some other articles where you do not have such a personal stake until you are more familiar with Wikipedia's policies on fringe theories, verifiability and other main policies. The welcome template provided by another editor above is a great guide to many of the keys of Wikipedia. Dana boomer (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Legal threat...
Wikipedia has a policy against legal threats such as you made here. I suggest you reconsider making such threats. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Coloredhorse, the way things work on wiki is to discuss the issue calmly and intelligently on the talk page of the article in question. We try to keep "horse politics" and emotionality out of it if we can. I am aware that their are some legal battles going on in the EU over who has control of the PRE studbook, and the web sites of the competing organizations indicate that there are some extremely heated debates going on about that right now.  However, wikipedia is not the place for those to spill over.  We have had similar "horse politics" involved with other breed articles, and at wikipedia, where a pillar is Neutral Point of View, we try to explain any controversies in a neutral matter, insist on proper footnotes, and not take sides.  I also understand that there is a flap between the ANCCE, the IALHA and the Foundation for the Pure Spanish Horse over varying definitions of what an Andalusian is.  In short, I am aware that there are several factions within the breed, and no one seems to get along very well.  So all we can do here is work to properly source this article and footnote the information it contains.  So please click on the "discussion" link at the article and we can discuss the issue on the talk page there.  Montanabw (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I have blocked you for the aforementioned legal thread, as instructed in the relevant policy; please see that page for more information. You may contest this block with . – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

But if any one try's to fix this he undoes all their hard work

This person has now updated the page with "half" truths that are still misleading. I can only believe that this must be self serving for him. But definitely not in the best interest of public knowledge.

Since this person seams to be adamant on spamming his bias opinion I do respectfully request that he be the one that is blocked

"This article includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (July 2008)"
 * If you look at the article now, you'll note that your information has been incorparted into the article, with the needed references. I'm the one that cleaned up your edit, making the references YOU provided fit the format used for wikipedia articles, and removing unneeded and unreliable sources. I also removed "peacocky" terms that are unsuitable for an encyclopedia. (Such as "Thanks to the efforts of many breeders and research being done by several colleges like UC Davis [] these colors may soon again grace these fabulous horses") which are also against Wikipedia practices. You'll note that the colors in the breed information you added, however, is still there. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)