User talk:STS01/Archive1

Bluefield - Personal Attacks & Not Assuming Good Faith
Hey Colin, I mean STS01, I went ahead and found a reference for the Guerrerro controversy after an exhaustive 30 second search on Google. I know slandering a dead guy makes for great radio, so I don't want to shortchange Cowherd at all in this article. Toodles. --Bluefield 15:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!! - Have a nice day! --STS01 15:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry though, I'm sure you will go back and pare away all of the negative aspects of this article soon enough. I have faith in you and your narrow minded goal of keeping this page controversy free. Keep up the good work. --Bluefield 15:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Just keepin it real. Does being a hater make you feel better about yourself? --STS01 15:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

A hater? A hater is somebody who tries to bring down a successful person just to see them crash and burn for the viewer or detractor's own delight. So unless you are a wildly successful Wikipeda editor, I'm not sure what you are talking about. And if you think I'm hating on Cowherd, you are again dead wrong. He is obviously a successful radio guy, but he crossed a big line by attacking sports blogs and dead athletes just to fill up some time on his show. My contributions to this page have nothing to do with wanting to see him fall, it has everything to do with documenting some of his more notable segments on his show. So go ahead and make sure you are "keepin it real" while you delete facts from Wikipedia. --Bluefield 15:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The information I removed needed a valid source. I have no problem with you adding negative information as long as it is properly sourced. --STS01 16:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Why didn't you just look to see if an alternative source was available before you just deleted the whole section? Would that not be the responsible thing to do? It is the deletion without research that makes most of your edits completely suspect.--Bluefield 16:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't do everything for you. Once again, please assume good faith here.--STS01 16:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Assumptions of good faith are valid in most instances, but there is abundant evidence that you are not exercising good faith in your edits. Editing in a slanted manner and then pointing to the good faith policy in order to justify your edits is not what the policy was meant to provide. And as to your "I can't do everything for you" comment, I agree, but you can do some things for the good of Wikipedia, namely, cursory research into legitimate portions of a page. --Bluefield 16:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Your certainly entitled to your opinion of me and my intentions here but I would advise you to keep those to yourself. Your way off-base. Maybe you should take SirFozzie's advice and step away for a bit. Hey man it's Friday...lighten up! Have a good one!)--STS01 17:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll let wikipedia sum up my opinion of you and we will leave it at that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanboy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_following

--Bluefield 17:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Bluefiled - I have tried to be polite with you. You seriously need to start assuming good faith. Your personal attacks are damaging and aren't helping you earn respect here. --STS01 17:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Listen, I'm confident that any outside observer who reviews the history of edits related to the Cowherd articles will not be looking at me with any suspicion when they are done. If my personal attacks on you are damaging to you....well, I'm not sure what to say. My statements to you are directly caused by your slanted and biased edits, so I can hardly say I'm sorry for anything I've posted. If people don't respect me for calling you out as a biased fan boy, so be it, but I'm completely content with everything I've posted and/or edited related to this topic.--Bluefield 17:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately you leave me with no choice but to warn you about your attacks. Please try to keep your cool and discuss edits that you disagree with in a civil manner. --STS01 18:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I hope that the censorshop styled editing of the pages in question doesn't go on any longer either...as you can see on the history page of the articles, my actions were a justified last resort as well. Nobody wants to be uncivil in this environment, but something had to be said. --Bluefield 19:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Your edits were hardly justified last resorts. You went out of your way to personally attack me in your edit summary. Enough said. --STS01 19:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

And you went out of your way to squash any criticism of Cowherd on his pages. Enough said.--Bluefield 19:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy related to information on living persons:

All negative material about living persons must be sourced to a reliable source. Do not wait for another editor to request a source. If you find unsourced or poorly sourced negative material about a living person — whether in an article or on a talk page — remove it immediately! Do not leave it in the article and ask for a source. Do not move it to the talk page. This applies whether the material is in a biography or any other article. ...learn it...live it.

It's shamefull that you have resorted to blanking your user talk page and personal attacks. --STS01 19:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Paul Finebaum
Do I have a good case for requesting semi-protection here? Any idea who these anon-IP editors really are, Is it the same person at different addresses? Realkyhick 21:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

If the same IP user tries to revert the article again, request a block on that IP. If I happen to catch it first, I will do it. Thanks for helping. --STS01 23:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * A bot caught him within seconds after vandalizing my user page. He's been blocked for 24 hours. Realkyhick 06:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Warning
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on The Herd With Colin Cowherd. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. --Bluefield 18:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you need to read your warnings and apply them to yourself. Your edits are not set in stone here. I'm free to modify them if I think I can improve them. Your personal grudge with me needs to cease ASAP. --STS01 18:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Grudge? Who has a grudge? I have honest and clear disputes with you over your edits, how does that amount to a grudge? I think we would both be better off if we left the Cowherd articles alone for an extended period of time. I will neither monitor them, edit them, nor even check them for the next two weeks, I think you should join me in this sabbatical. And for the record, how do I have the grudge when you are the one posting warnings on my page?--Bluefield 18:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

As can be seen on this page, my warning to you was a justified last resort. I have chosen to work on certain articles here and I'm not going to put up with your attacks on my user talk page any longer. --STS01 19:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: IP
While I appreciate the sentiment and I'm reviewing your edits to those articles with WP:AGF in mind, I am at a loss as to why you felt the need to create typos in that IP's comments where they did not exist... --Moralis (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are refering to but I can assure you any typos were unintentional. --STS01 20:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
Just for the record, I am in no way associated with those anonymous IP edits of your page. If you check the IPs, they seem to be based out of the South (North Carolina and Georgia if I'm not mistaken) and I live in NJ. I've attempted to sign everything I've posted on here, as taking anonymous shots at people (albeit that all of Wikipedia is anonymous...but you get the idea.) Take it easy. --Bluefield 20:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Good to know. I just wanted someone to check it out. The 5th grader mentality of these vandals is laughable. --STS01 20:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of laughable....be honest. That picture got at least a chuckle out of you right? --Bluefield 20:56, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Surprising..definitely but I'd seen it before...I did laugh a little cause I knew that was the end of it.(for a good laugh, check out some of the cowherd spoofs on youtube.com. --STS01 21:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)