User talk:Rossputin

Hello,

Please read WP:RS. Do not remove those sources that is vandalism and will get you blocked. Do not add sources that are not reliable to the articles because its a violation of WP:BLP.

Also your activity shows you are a WP:SPA. Paper45tee (talk) 15:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Oda Mari (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Sources and POV
Please review WP:RS on what type of material is used on wikipedia, and stop inserting claims from dubious or partisan websites. Moreover, your sole purpose has been to edit two articles: one in negative light and the other in bad light. Please review WP:NPOV.

It is because of these two issues that your edits have been reverted several times. Paper45tee (talk) 18:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Bob Schaffer
It is quite amusing, Paper45tee, to see a claim that what I'm doing is dubious or partisan. Have you looked at what I have been correcting? Opponents of Bob Schaffer have been adding nothing more than unverified or partisan accusations to his Wikipedia page, and have been deleting FACTS about Mark Udall (namely that he has admitted direct ties to Jack Abramoff money, whereas there is no such tie to Schaffer despite his opponents making that charge, and that Udall's wife is a liberal activist.) All I have been doing is trying to create a level playing field, by adding some balance to the outrageous posts of Schaffer opponents, and adding a parallel "Election Controversies" section to Mark Udall's page.