User talk:Murraydeluxxxe

Your edit to Swarthmore, Pennsylvania
Please do not add content to the Wikipedia that is not encyclopedic. Renato's is not a "cultural institution". It's just a pizza place that kids like to hang out at. -- Scjessey 17:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Dearest Simon,

With regards to your comment "Please do not add content to the Wikipedia that is not encyclopedic. Renato's is not a "cultural institution". It's just a pizza place that kids like to hang out at. -- Scjessey 17:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)", it is clear that your definition of a 'cultural institution' is quite narrow and it is a statement with which I take great umbrage with. It also seems quite odd that man who has a thing for Dale Jr. would feel qualified to make judgments on which things, and which things are not, are worthy of being deemed ‘cultural institutions’.

My formative years were spent in the borough of Swarthmore from 1978 to 1993. As such a good deal of my time was spent at ‘just a pizza place’, as you call it.

And it was at that ‘just a pizza place’ that I learned the workings of love, kinship, commerce, heartbreak, and hope.

The lessons learned there were more relevant, and more lasting, then any play, music, art showing, or other bits of ‘culture’ that I took in at Swarthmore College.

Since then, trips back to the borough would not be complete without a luncheon at ‘just a pizza place’. And while there, it warms my heart to see yet another generation living the same discoveries at ‘just a pizza place’ that I discovered many years ago.

But, then as a person who did not come of age in Swarthmore, it would be foolish of me to expect that you could understand the cultural relevance of ‘just a pizza place’ to the town, and to the people, of which it is located.

So, sir, I surmise that we will agree to disagree. In that, I will continue to post the institutions that I feel are integral to the cultural make up of Swarthmore, just as you feel it is your duty to cast judgments on them.

And as we both labor in professions that require us to spend copious amounts of time at a computer, I believe we can look forward to many years of posting, deleting, posting, deleting, ad infinitum.

Cordially,

Murraydeluxxxe


 * Your repeated edits to Swarthmore, Pennsylvania are in violation of Policies and guidelines; specifically the policies regarding original research. Your thoughts and feelings about Swarthmore are certainly valid - Swarthmore is a beautiful place with a rich culture; however, such personal romanticisms are not appropriate for the Wikipedia. If we cannot resolve this matter between us, I will formally request a third opinion. -- Scjessey 20:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Seek your third opinion. For I reject the notion that you, Simon Jessy, have been appointed intergalactic judge of what is, and what is not, culturally relevant in the universe.

Cordially,

Murraydeluxxxe.

PS: Try the cheesfries. They are excellent. While most establishments use only a type of 'Cheese Wiz', 'just a pizza place' uses mozzarella, and in vast quantities.


 * A third opinion has been sought. Since you are a newcomer to the Wikipedia, I must inform you that multiple reversions of an article (3 times or more within 24 hours) is in violation of Wikipedia policy, and may result in having your account temporarily blocked by an administrator. I am bound by the same rules and so I will not be reverting your inappropriate edits until 24 hours have passed or we have heard from the third opinion Wikipedian (whichever is sooner). -- Scjessey 21:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It is not a question of opinions about cultural relevance. If something is notable enough to be in the encyclopedia, there will be information about it in reliable sources.  These reliable sources help to ensure that all information on wikipedia is verifiable.  If information cannot pass any of those thresholds, it is not included in the encyclopedia on the basis that it is either non-notable or original research.  -- Pastordavid 21:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

3 Revert Rule
Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Pastordavid 21:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Dearest Simon,

I find your categorization of my edits as ‘inappropriate’, well, inappropriate. It again, goes back to the fact that you, Simon Jessy, view yourself as the Judge of what is, and what is not, culturally relevant. It is a stance that I find hard to reconcile with your description of yourself on your user page, which purports that you are a man who would not cast such aspersions. But then, there you go.

Cordially,

Brian Murray

PS: Also, if you have not sampled their water ice, I do recommend that as well. Don’t worry about choosing a flavor, for if you ask they will gladly combine multiple flavors into a single cup.


 * Hi Murray, I'm watching the page in question now... I'd realy encurage you not to make anouther revert today or someone might block you from editing for a day or two. See our 3 revert rule. (WP:3RR) It's an important tool to prevent edit waring.
 * I think the problem here with what you want to include is that there are no citations included... no reliable sources refrences. We have a rule that everything must be verifiable by reliable sources. (going there and trying the water ice myself dosn't count as a reliable source, no matter how tasty! :) )  Good luck, and if you have any questions let me know. ---J.S  (T/C/WRE) 22:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding a new Section
The appropriate place for the information probably would be under a new heading. HOWEVER, it still would have to be information that was verifiable; that is, you would have to provide citations of reliable sources that not only mention that the place exists, but that it is notable. I would strongly suggest familiarizing yourself with the linked policies, as they apply not just to the information in question, but to any information to be added to wikipedia. I hope that helps. -- Pastordavid 22:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

"It seems that you have been appointed to cast aspersions on others."
I am just a regular Wikipedia user. Please refrain from all of these upsetting personal comments - I'm just one of millions trying to make the Wikipedia the best it can be. -- Scjessey 11:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Kettle? Pot here. You're black
Dearest Simon,

I believe in your quest to make wikipedia the best that it can be, you have, in the same breath, exhibited the worst that it can be.

With regards to your comment ‘upsetting personal comments’, you drew first blood, sir, when you called a hallowed ground that is sacred to native Swarthmoreans ‘just a pizza place’.

Is that not an ‘aspersion’? And did you not cast that aspersion?

What if I were to refer to your personal secular Jesus as ‘just a driver’? After all, there are a number of drivers far better than the Little E. (David Pearson, Cale Yarborough, and Alan Kulwicki come to mind.)  So, other than a pedigreed bloodline, a Wrangler Jeans commercial and copious amounts of hair styling product, he’s is ‘just a driver’.

With that, I apologize that my ‘personal comments’ set your knickers in a twist, but as they say, sir, when you point a finger, you get three back at yourself.

So, perhaps in the future you will be more mindful of the stones you choose to throw.

Cordially,

Murraydeluxxxe

PS: Next time your are at ‘just a pizza place’ you must try their Black Cherry soda. It tastes as if angels themselves had squeezed the cherries.

PPS: Did you not find it ironic, and slightly humorous, that a self avowed atheist required a Pastor to come to come to their rescue with ‘divine intervention’? That Pastor David does seem like quite a nice chap, though.


 * I'm not really sure what on Earth you are talking about. You have completely missed the point of the Wikipedia, and about how to make contributions to it,. In frustration for your obvious error, you have decided to launch a volley of unwarranted personal attacks at me. I have made no such attack upon you.
 * You seem to think Renato's is something special in the the Grand Scheme of Things, and you are free to think that if you wish; however, I was absolutely correct in removing your addition on the basis of a complete lack of notability and original research.
 * Now perhaps you should read this article before saying anything else to me, unless it is the apology I clearly deserve. -- Scjessey 16:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Time to Cool Off
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. -- Everyone back to their corners, please. Your most recent comments on Scjessey's talk page were inappropriate. Even if you feel that he has insulted you in some way, the best response is not to respond on his talk page. The best response to minor insults is to ignore them. -- Pastordavid 17:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)