User talk:Lucianotis

this is my talk page, if you have any problems with the articles i write post it here, don't go around changing stuff you probably don't know anything about


 * Sorry, but after consideration I've reverted the page further. If you would like to discuss misconceptions about the Dobermann breed (and I do agree that there are some unfortunate ideas about these dogs), please try to take it factually and from a neutral point of view.  More guidance on that can be found at Neutral point of view, as well as Verifiability.  I think you have good information to offer, but it has a much greater chance of staying in the article if you strive for more objectivity.  I really hope you will consider this and possibly re-edit the piece, keeping Wikipedia content guidelines in mind—and I hope you don't see this as a personal attack.  I might have been wrong to revert your edit again, and am willing to discuss that and apologize (and fix things) if it comes to light that I have truly erred.


 * I'll add in a little bit at the talk page for the article about possible revisions. Thanks for your time!  —PaperTruths 23:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Update: I just took a closer look at the Dobermann page, and think you might find this link helpful: Temperament. It appears that note has already been made that this breed is sometimes unfairly stereotyped.  Also, as a side note, most other Wikipedians tend to take a dim view of having their comments on talk pages blanked.  I understand that it can be upsetting to have your work challenged, changed, or reverted when you were honestly trying to improve an article, and that your first reaction might be to revert right back and blank any criticism.  However, in this community, it tends to set people off.  Letting the comments stay, and replying to them with any disputes, almost always has better results.  It can be hard to keep your cool, but if you manage it, I think you'll find other editors much more willing to work with you and take you more seriously.  —PaperTruths 23:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I took a look at your edit, and it is indeed better than before. However, I'm willing to bet that it will still be edited and revised by others.  I'm going to take a step back from it and let you work things out with the other editors, because there seems to be a potential for things to get kinda heated.  I don't want that to happen; I quite honestly believe that your intentions are very good, and don't want any unpleasantness to develop between us.


 * One last note: you obviously feel quite strongly about preserving the quality of the reputation of this breed. Please try to consider that other editors feel just as strongly about preserving the quality of Wikipedia's content.  That seems to be the main motivation behind the editors who have been reverting your changes.  Ideally, we're all working towards bettering Wikipedia.  It's unfortunate that this leads to inevitable disputes, but if you keep in mind that everyone involved has good intentions, it might make things easier all 'round.  (And I think absolutely everyone is guilty of forgetting that sometimes—it's easy to get caught up in things that one is passionate about.)  Anyway, cheers, and hope you have a good day.  —PaperTruths 00:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Elf (whose edits to this page you removed) and PaperTruths that your edits are POV. What you have written is not even true. Although I have known many dobies that match what you say (including the two I have owned), there are dobies that meet the worst stereotypes that people hold. Fortunately they are few. They are arguably the result of bad breeding and bad upbringing, but to say they don't exist is simply incorrect.--Curtis Clark 03:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)