User talk:Tre=poi

Ed Gein
Please stop trying to completely rewrite this article. There has been much discussion and issues regarding this article and much consensus to arrive at the version which you are now changing. You have changed and removed sourcing and introduced, rather than decreased, ambiguity and tied more referencing to the Crime Library, rather than diminishing it. I cannot see that this has improved the rating, but lowered to at least C class from a high B class. Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree. The article had an unencyclopedia style and a "sensational" tone likely influenced by the sources. The article has improved considerably under my revisions and now reads like an encyclopedia article.  The references could still be improved but don't worry about my lowering this article to a C level. It was there when I found it; I brought it up to a B level and will continue to do so. Tre=poi (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * In fact, no. I do the assessments regarding class status for WP:CRIME and you are simply wrong. Do not cut and change against consensus or I will take you to WP:AN/I to enforce the consensus. Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, who am I talking to? God? Who are you to decide that upgrading an article deserves reversion to an inferior edition. You are wrong. The article as I found it was C level, a poorly written, sensational article with some off topic tangents.  If you've been appointed to determine an article's level, then you should consider resigning. Tre=poi (talk) 14:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * (EC) As a disinterested third party who noticed this because your talk page was on my watch list, Tre=poi please observe WP:BRD. You have boldly redone the article in a manner which appears to conflict with the consensus of the WP:CRIME project. These edits have been reverted. Rather than restoring them, you need to open a discussion on the article talk page explaining the edits you made, why you feel they improve the article from a C to a B class, and get consensus for those changes. Reverting and dismissing the efforts of experienced editors, insulting other editors, (and dismissing sources as "trashy") will not aid in those discussions. Please remember to be civil and assume good faith. Wikipedia is a community-based encyclopedia, where we work cooperatively with one another to achieve the best results. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 14:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you Collectonian for stepping in with some very wise words. I will keep them in mind from this time forth.  Will you compare the two articles and render a verdict on which of the two are better and why? Thank you so much! Tre=poi (talk) 14:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Indian captives
Hallo, I've left a note at Talk:Thomas_Brown_(Indian_captive). Please try and find a different disambiguator to use: "Indian captive" sounds like a person from India who is a captive. If you need to discuss, please do so at that talk page, to keep it in one place. I've also nominated Category:Indian captives for renaming, and I note that although you've created it, you haven't put it within any other categories as is normally done. Thanks. PamD (talk) 16:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm learning! Tre=poi (talk) 17:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK problem
Hello! Your submission of Charles Johnston (captive of Native Americans) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Little Mountain  5   Happy Thanksgiving!  16:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Blocked as a sock puppet
You have been. (blocked by MuZemike 04:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC))

You may contest this block by adding the text below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.