User talk:Historymike/Archive/Archive-Nov2006

Begin

John Mark Karr
I respectfully disagree with your deletion of the link on the breaking news of John Mark Karr seeking a sex change operation. A site's status as a blog is not a reason to disqualify; the author is a national journalist. Also, in the future be so kind as to offer a replacement, instead of merely deleting the material. Thanks!Historymike 19:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Michael, Michael Borooks is a "national journalist"? Are you serious? Seriously? Anyways, blogs are frowned upon in this project (especially in WP:BLP), trying to reach a little higher. See WP:RS, WP:CITE and WP:NOT. Thanks...--Tom 19:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike. While i agree that your blog entry is notable enough for inclusion, please be aware of potential WP:VANITY issues - its generally a good idea to let other people revert your blog. Nice work, by the way, i always find your blog interesting.  Rockpock e  t  20:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No need to be rude, Tom. Yes, "national" journalist, thank you very much.  I have been published in national periodicals, write about national and international issues, and my work has been featured in such media outlets as MSNBC, CBS.com, and Slate, among others.Historymike 20:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Wasn't trying to be rude, sorry if you took it that way. Its just that I don't believe ANYTHING on the Web these days :). Seriously though, its a Wiki no-no to write/edit your own biography. I would suggest using the talk page for clarification as needed. It seems that its hard to remain NPOV when writing about one's self. Anyways....--Tom 20:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Documenting possible conflict
The information below is being copied in case it is deleted from the Discussion page of Tom, who has been following me around and making petty changes to edits I have made. I do not know this person, and do not understand why this user is destroying my work and that of people who had the misfortune of working on the same articles I edited.

''National Nitwit

''Again, I take issue with your removal of the link to the e-zine's website. If the article itself does not survive the review process, the link will be deleted. If, however, the article stays, then the link to the blog in very much in keeping. BTW - I am beginning to suspect that this user has some unknown issue with me for some reason, as Tom has been making numerous petty changes to work I have edited. If I am mistaken, my apologies are in order.Historymike 02:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

''Reckless deletions

''This user, Tom,is not only is making pointless deletions to work I have edited, he is also deleting material that is completely relevant that I DIDN'T edit. Case in point - he deleted all references to the John Gunckel memorial pyramid in Toledo because I linked to a photo I took of the mausoleum. There are at least five other edits I made in which this user not only took issue with a link, but wantonly erased valuable information, damaging the purpose of a collective project. Again, Tom, if you have some personal beef with me, I would like to know what it is, otherwise - find a better use for your time. And I also repeat - if you are going to delete something, find a legitimate replacement. I linked to an interview I did with activist Mike Ferner that Tom deleted. The material was relevant, added to external links, and appears only to be deleted because Tom does not like information located on blogs. Am I missing something???Historymike 02:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)''

National Nitwit
Again, I take issue with your removal of the link to the e-zine's website. If the article itself does not survive the review process, the link will be deleted. If, however, the article stays, then the link to the blog in very much in keeping. BTW - I am beginning to suspect that this user has some unknown issue with me for some reason, as Tom has been making numerous petty changes to work I have edited. If I am mistaken, my apologies are in order.Historymike 02:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike, seriously, nothing personal. If I hadn't made the changes, somebody, eventually would have. I would recommend that you review some of Wikipedia's policy, guidelines and FAQs at WP:HELP. Also review the messages I have left on your talk page. Thanks...--Tom 14:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Reckless deletions
This user, Tom,is not only is making pointless deletions to work I have edited, he is also deleting material that is completely relevant that I DIDN'T edit. Case in point - he deleted all references to the John Gunckel memorial pyramid in Toledo because I linked to a photo I took of the mausoleum. There are at least five other edits I made in which this user not only took issue with a link, but wantonly erased valuable information, damaging the purpose of a collective project. Again, Tom, if you have some personal beef with me, I would like to know what it is, otherwise - find a better use for your time. And I also repeat - if you are going to delete something, find a legitimate replacement. I linked to an interview I did with activist Mike Ferner that Tom deleted. The material was relevant, added to external links, and appears only to be deleted because Tom does not like information located on blogs. Am I missing something???Historymike 02:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike, see above. Also, you probably aren't really "missing something???", I would chalk it up to the Wiki learning curve. Anyways, this project can always use improvement so keep at it. Cheers --Tom 14:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Blank page - FYI
From Criteria for speedy deletion: If the author blanks the page, this can be taken as a deletion request. Not vandalism, as you accused me of doing to a page I authored. Thanks! 72.240.144.166 01:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If you read the next line it goes on to say...Note: Please check the page history to make sure there is only a single author.....You were NOT the only author to edit that biography so YES, it WAS vandalism, but I would assume good faith and chalk it up to being NEW...I would imagine that we BOTH have better things to do?? -Tom 13:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I certainly do have better things to do, but it seems that you don't. I can only speak for myself.  When I tried to correct the problem (deleting vanity bio I authored) you impishly reverted back to the very page you were complaining about, trying to stake the high Wiki moral ground by whining about "vandalism" on a page I authored.  I have requested deletion, so please move on and find something more constructive to do.  I have apologized for the vanity bio, but you seem to take a perverse joy in stretching this out.  Whatever, dude.Historymike 15:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)