User talk:LiberalMindset

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Zero Serenity (talk) 17:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Daily Kos. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 01:39, 17 January 2014 (UTC) Apparently, after this report concluded, you saw fit to put the article back to your version. Then, the other party added only a tag, another editor reverted you, and you reverted both of them. It's true you sought a third opinion, but that wasn't sufficient once another editor was involved in the discussion. Finally, your comment on the talk page {"you folks are getting more and more ridiculous") evinced an I'm right mentality.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Your remarks about what "the owner of the site explicitly said" are irrelevant to the unblock request, since the block is for edit warring, but to save future misunderstanding I will answer you anyway. Wikipedia does not exist as a medium for people, businesses, or organisations to promulgate their own preferred views of themselves. A Wikipedia article should reflect what independent, third party, reliable sources say about its subject, which is often very different from what the subject of the article would like the article to say. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:16, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Example: Fox News "Fair & Balanced" is their slogan, despite this and this existing in such large size. Zero Serenity (talk) 14:39, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, when so-called "reliable" media sources conflict on basic distinctions, I'd say there's a problem and a need for a more thorough objective analysis, yet I'm unaware of any such analyses. You can have this one, Zero Serenity -- you obviously have a lot more clout around here than I thought you did. Edit warring, heh. I would recommend "progressive point of view" over "liberal point of view," but you'll do what you'll do, I suppose. LiberalMindset (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Forgot to add: I changed Markos' page on here too, so you may want to change that one for consistency with the Daily Kos page. Take it easy. LiberalMindset (talk) 15:18, 17 January 2014 (UTC)