User talk:Ej0c

Bob Ney
Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 18:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a second notice. Please do not insert heavily point-of-view material into the Bob Ney. I have deleted it twice. Specifically, this is the problematical text:


 * partisans began leaking bits of federal investigations to the Washington Post and other media. Ney, a Republican in the Democrat-coveted steel and coal territory of Appalachian Ohio, soon became a target of unrelenting media and activist controvery. At this time, federal prosecutors continue the investigation, with links to Ney being officially unconfirmed, but widely circulated in the press and blogsphere.


 * This entire article is heavily point of view. You just do not seem to have the learnedness to appreciate that fact. --Ej0c 13:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * "partisans"; "Democrat-coveted", "unrelenting", "activist", are all highly subjective wording that is inappropriate for wikipedia.


 * Eighty percent of this article is highly subjective and inappropriate for Wikipedia. I am only trying to make 4% of it more fair to someone who has not even been charged, let alone tried and convicted. --Ej0c 13:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If you still feel like posting this text, please discuss it first, either here or on the talk/discussion page for Bob Ney.
 * So far, I am the only person to discuss things on the talk/discussion page for Ney. --Ej0c 13:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I am moving this discussion to the Bob Ney talk page. But I want to note two things here.  First, I think you'll get a lot better reaction from other people (and I hope you want to work with other people - Wikipedia is intended to be a community project) if you point out specific things that are wrong, rather than just complaining in general about the whole article.  If your complaints are specific, it's always easier for someone to offer better wording.  Second, the proper way to fix a "highly subjective" article is NOT to add offsetting subjective text, as you have done - rather, it's to fix the subjective text, and to add substantive objective information.  (Note that I didn't delete the additions to the article about Bob Ney's legislative accomplishments.) John Broughton 17:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Huh. I guess Ney was guilty after all. Who would have guessed? Perhaps you were the subjective one. --The Cunctator 15:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * ? What has the outcome to do with our objectivity and quest for educational excellence?? --Ej0c 12:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

George Washington
Thank you for your contributions at George Washnigton. However, I'm not sure that it's any better as it stands. Would you be interested in working together to make it better? Come to think of it, do you even know if it is appropriate for an encyclopedia article? In other words, is it salvagable as it now stands? Let me know what you think - I'll be in contact on the George Washington talk page, or my talk page. If you aren't interested, just ignore this - I will too. --Trevdna 04:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Fighting McCooks
Thanks for the greeting! I am a native of the Zanesville, Ohio area and lived for many years in NE Ohio, so Ohio history is a particular topic of interest for me. My ancestors fought in the 51st Ohio, a regiment raised in the Dover - New Philadelphia area. I am researching a possible book on that regiment. Scott Mingus (talk) 18:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)