User talk:Slothman8888

Kevin Powell
Hello. With regards to the above article, please read our policy regarding biographies of living persons. Information presented on living people must be neutral and impeccably sourced. Sources such as, , and  do not meet that policy. Please see Verifiability for sources that do. You should also read our policy on neutrality.

While it seems obvious that you have strong feelings about this individual, given that you seem yourself to have authored that last blog entry, not everyone does. I am not "a member of Kevin Powell's hired shills" but an administrator on Wikipedia, and I am monitoring this article to ensure that contributors neither use it to promote nor to denigrate this individual. In fact, I had earlier restored your version myself before a contributor pointed out to me that the sourcing was inappropriate per policies. In addition to the above policies, you may also wish to read the guideline on assuming good faith. Using such rhetoric against other contributors to the article might lead you to difficulties with respect to our civility policy that could result in your account being blocked.

With respect to the article, it could certainly use some careful attention to sourcing in the middle section. If you would like to contribute to it, please keep in mind that our purpose here is to "document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable secondary sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral and factual, avoiding both understatement and overstatement." (WP:BLP) Edits to the article must reflect that.

If you would like to further discuss how best to serve the interests of Wikipedia with this article, please feel free to leave me a note at my talk page. You can also utilize the talk page of the article to discuss potential development of it, however since my only concern is maintaining the neutrality and preventing the article being used again as a vehicle of copyright infringement, I am unlikely to participate there. If you wish feedback on whether or not a source is reliable for our purposes, we have a Reliable sources/Noticeboard. If you have a question about the neutrality of material, we have a Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. We also have a help desk, typically manned around the clock by volunteers, where you can seek general assistance in editing Wikipedia.

Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it seems that you are actually rejecting facts which have been published in various media, as well as comments even from the Kevin Powell for Congress campaign. I can understand that you are so very concerned about his "brand." I'm actually concerned about the truth and keeping Wikipedia a free, honest, and truthful source. For example, citing that post on R8NY is relevant because Kevin Powell's campaign manager posted a response. That makes it an authoritative source, with an original comment from the campaign itself.

Pointing out facts like he didn't come through on a promise to have Dave Chappelle show up, that he promised Orthodox Jews he would bring home the bacon, and that he had not filed his FEC paperwork in time - you have no right to deny them. And as such, I am going to have to report you. Regardless of what I might do on other sites, you have already shown you are in communication with the candidate, and have been authorized by his campaign to remove things harmful to his brand. But when that includes the truth, it is time for your partisan efforts to be exposed. Sorry, but those are the facts. And I'd appreciate if in the future, you didn't try to disguise your partisan efforts by some claim to truth. You've already shown that doesn't interest you.


 * I've restored the comments which you deleted, since without them your response has no context. I have also again restored the previous version of the article for the reasons explained above. I will note the matter at the biographies of living persons noticeboard for additional review. (Editing to add, from the above I suspect that you are misinterpreting my note here. That link is to a comment made by another contributor on my talk page, not a note that I made.) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The listing can be found here, if you would like to contribute. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.  Acroterion  (talk)  19:30, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Your blog is not a reliable source. Please stop making accusations of collusion against those who disagree with you.   Acroterion  (talk)  19:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Any further discussion on this matter should be accomplished on the article's talk page, preferably without invective against other editors, and without using blogs or primary sourcing. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and does not publish original research.   Acroterion  (talk)  19:41, 24 November 2008 (UTC)