User talk:Mooksas

<!--Mooksas,here. Littleredm&m has been discovered as a sockpuppet of accounts seeking to alter the Indiana Gregg entry. One particular sockpuppet left a message on this talk page, seeking to explain and excuse their actions. Shortly after leaving this text on my page, the author was banished indefinitely. I present the following text only as historical evidence. To wit:

mooksas, I haven't reverted edits. However, some of the edits sound very labourious and makes the article sound amateur. For example, does there need to be mention of how much someone pays to enter a contest? I don't think there are entries about how much Schumacher paid to enter formula 1 for example. We also know that Gregg played several festivals in Scotland last year. However, normally an artist's name won't appear on the bill unless they are a headline act. So, why does wikieditor2008 say it is exactly 2 festivals. It just sounds like bad reporting and a true encyclopedia editor wouldn't make such nonsensical entries. I have found various citations and have changed a sentence that he claimed used 'weasel words'. So, I edited it to read that "gregg received media attention...blah..."..etc. However, wikieditor2008 even reverted that edit back to read 'weasel words'. What is the point in that kind of conduct? Also, it was discussed about the DOB and it's clear that there is no proper source, therefore, awkwardly mentioning it throughout the text saying" then 35", "then 50", sounds silly. Wikieditor2008 needs to remember that this is meant to be improved and not labourious. Also, Sandifer pointed out that tabloids are not reliable sources for information, thus striking the Pirate Bay article from the Daily Express. I do not see any true attempt to improve the article coming from wikieditor2008, he simply seems to be hoping to introduce a lot of labourious material that, I believe, most editors would eliminate. I haven't made any reversions at all yesterday. If you look at the edits I made, it was based upon the discussion and suggestions from Phil Sandifer about tabloids. Also, based on a rule that you, yourself, had pointed out in the discussion.Littleredm&amp;m (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)