Talk:Kimo von Oelhoffen

Please note, as a fellow Cincinnatian, I'm as angry about Carson getting taken down as the rest of you are. However wikipedia has a *strict* Neutral Point of View Policy, detailed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPOV . Editing the article to express your opinion on what happened as fact is in clear violation of this policy. Mentioning that some people feel the hit was deliberate and the remorse faked might be okay, but stating it as a fact is not. These continued edits to make try to make von Oelhoffen sound bad just reflect badly on Bengals fans everywhere. Treat this project with the serious and respect it deserves, please? -Graptor 66.42.131.139 08:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

--chron-- The above note should be respected. As a Steelers fan, I'm disappointed at the fact an injury occured to Palmer of such magnitude. Kimo is a former Bengal and an upstanding person. I highly suggest seeking out taped interviews of him to get an idea of his composure and his personality. He's soft spoken and humble, and his good nature is very apparent. But as the poster above mentioned, it really is irrevelent. Opinions are not to be posted in an article.

-- I agree. Intentionlly injuring another player is a serious charge and since the NFL has not accused Kimo van Oelhoffen of this, the language has no place in a neutral article. -NRP

--Awfully biased article, completely unfounded in its accusiations.

-- Can we do something about the obvious vandal who continually reverts this page? It's getting ridiculous.

Not as long as he keeps refreshing his IP address. It's not a big deal to simply continue to revert the article - he'll get bored and wonder off eventually. Kuru ^talk 23:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I put the hit back in as it had been taken out entirely and I've already had to revert the anon insertion of POV twice. I think the language as it stands is appropriate. I do imagine that this will go away as the next season draws and as Palmer gets back in the Bengals lineup. There should easily be enough editors here to enable us all to avoid 3rr in the meantime. MLA 16:13, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed Bias added by User:Ferr. Looking at his talk page, he's got two warnings for removing content, two bot warnings about no copyright tag on a picture he uploaded, a bot message from a bot that claims to remove vandalism(and seems to be informing the reverted person in case it wasn't), a second no copyright warning from the first bot, and now this POV Edit. Both Images are deleted, but it almost looks as if he's not looking at his talk page, or his user page for that matter, and probably hasn't seen the warnings or informatives. No idea what to do, if anything. -Graptor 66.42.129.239 04:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Or not, it seems he removed a warning from his user page about a bad edit to Steve Irwin. Sounds like someone needs a serious wake-up call. -Graptor 66.42.129.239 04:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

-- Why are you looking at all of the negatives and at none of the positives? You're such a pessimist. -ferr