User talk:Telogen

Ralph Nader

Griot: If you include the Atlantic Mo. quote, which is a POV, then you should allow space for a rebuttal. The rebuttal I posted, which was sourced, was either removed or moved to the "results" section... a space where there were POVs presented on whether Nader or not he was a spoiler. This is the proper place to discuss our disagreements in the wiki. The introduction is NOT THE PLACE FOR A DEBATE.

Telogen: Im glad you and others dont agree with the Atlantic Monthly statement. It's full of bull. I think GORE gave Bush the presidency. He won didn't he? So why isn't he our pres? Oh wait, he also lost his own state, lost appeal to many progressives and independent voters...and millions of Democrats...who voted for Bush. Gore also did better in polls with Nader IN THE RACE, not OUT. There are so many other factors. Diebold. Supreme Court vote. Katherine Harris. But you know this. Peace out. myko2 9:52, 20 March 2007

I think you misuderstand Wikipedia's POV policy. The policy states that contributors may not express their own points of view, but may include other's POV in articles as long as they are properly sourced. Including the quote from the Atlantic Monthly is not POV. Griot 14:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? Telogen 06:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about your contribution to the Ralph Nader Disucssion page on March 9, where the discussion is about whether to include a quote about Nader from the Atlantic Monthly: You wrote, "'An Unreasonable Man' played at Sundance and really offered a lot of insight from one political analyst from Harvard, an admitted Democrat, as to why the notion that Nader 'spoiled' the 2000 election can't be true. The filmmakers are Democrats, also, so it's very interesting, they show many sides to the argument. They said they came to the same conclusion, through the process of making the film. You might want to check it out. But, as you say, it's not really relevant. Opinion is opinion. The editorial doesn't belong. Telogen 04:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)." The Nader Discussion page shows you made contributions on March 10, March 9, and March 8. Are you on a network with other people? It could be that you are sharing a computer or network connection with others and somebody else signed into Wikipedia under your name or you forgot to sign out when you left your computer. Just a heads up. Griot 16:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, thanks. Yeah, this is a communal ISP, so I'm not sure. I'm pretty good about signing out, though.

As for the POV issue, I agree that POV should be removed, not just The Atlantic bit, but a lot of other info. See NPOV policy page.

That's my vote, anyhow... Take care... Telogen 02:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk

Thanks for your help. I agree with what you're saying, but please don't del my pages. Telogen 16:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Defend yourself, why don't ya? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Telogen

Your silence speaks volumes. 71.139.27.85 20:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave the evidence of Vandalism and Harrassment on my page. Please do not remove. Telogen 07:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Absinthe (band)

A tag has been placed on Absinthe (band), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Cathal 05:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked

Since the person who uses this account also edits as User:76.166.123.129, and both have "voted" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeanne Marie Spicuzza, you have violated Wikipedia's sock puppet policy, so I have blocked this account for 1 week. If you believe this block is unjustified you may appeal by placing the text {{unblock|your reason here}} on this talk page. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Three editors have used this IP.Telogen 18:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request assistance from Miltopia, Thespian, Myko2, PastorDavid, 76.166.123.129, DavidShankBone, PeterHuffington, other fair, impartial eds and admins. Please review contents of this dispute. There are some very unjust occurances. Thanks in advance. Telogen 18:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can try contacting those users yourself. -- John Reaves (talk) 19:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Telogen, thanks for your request for assistance. I do not, however, have a great deal of time to wade into this issue at the moment, being otherwise occupied with other projects on-wiki and other events in real life. That said, I did notice a couple of things just glancing at things.

Jeanne Marie Spicuzza was deleted through a valid AfD, which ran its full course and was closed by an uninvolved admin. You could attempt to have the article undeleted through deletion review, but I doubt that it would be successful. I would let it go.
Given your recent block, might I strongly suggest that asking 76.166... for help is not a good idea -- since that is what led to your last 1 week block.
It seems we have been down this road before with Ralph Nader (although I did not notice much edit-warring going on in the article history). Sometimes the best thing to do is just step away fromt he article for a while. Take it off your watchlist, and find something esle to work on for a while. You never know, if you give others a crack at it, you might like the end result.

Sorry that I don't have more time to help sort this out. Pastordavid 14:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, ref PastorDavid Talk page. Telogen 00:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your your message on my talk page

I really have no idea what you are talking about. Furthermore, I haven't any interest in becoming involved in these matters. I will thank you not to leave me any further messages. ---Cathal 03:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See comment, above, and reply on your talk page. Telogen 04:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to:

Thanks

Thanks Theoldanarchist. Maybe you could help with Absinthe, Sam Llanas and Jeanne Marie Spicuzza articles. Telogen 00:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism log

more to come...

Cathal (cur) (last) 05:33, 29 May 2007 Darylxu (Talk | contribs) (20,844 bytes) (cur) (last) 05:18, 29 May 2007 Telogen (Talk | contribs) (20,740 bytes) (thx)

Wikipedia/Google/Yahoo

http://www.betanews.com/article/Google_Offers_to_Host_Wikipedia/1108144572

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/02/13/many_contributors_common_cause

Centiare

Thank you ElectricEye and Andman8!

Pornography

I discovered bio on Jimmy Wales. Cannot support pornography. Bad karma. Bye bye. Telogen 06:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I'm the only one left. I'm going to check out Centiare too. Looks like it will be way better than WP. 76.166.123.129 23:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have left Wikipedia

Er... this account is rather obviously a sockpuppet. Returning from a several-month hiatus to join an edit war you would otherwise have no way of finding out about with such perfect timing? In any case, I don't know if you're a "friend" or the same person, but as fair warning, this talk page will be immediately protected if it becomes used for the same purposes as User talk:76.166.123.129 -- my goal is keep this disruption off of the wiki itself. Feel free to contact the Wikimedia Foundation, directly, instead. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a friend, protecting a friend from Wikipedia's obvious Kafka-esque policies. That is the clearest thing. Telogen

And your friend contacted you, explained the situation, asked for your help, and then you logged in and reverted, all in three minutes? Assuming I believe that, what's going to happen if I unblock you? – Luna Santin (talk) 00:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We share with a few users. See history.

I'm interested in seeing justice. I don't want to participate in Wikipedia, because I don't support porography. But I don't want to see these continued attacks on this user. A "20-something journalist" isn't Jeanne Marie Spicuzza. This user has a right to her talk page. She has a right not to be harrassed. Telogen 01:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And how is she being harassed, at the moment? – Luna Santin (talk) 01:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's self evident. Maybe she's the one you should be talking with? Telogen 02:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't see how it is -- if it were, you wouldn't have any difficulty describing it for me, either; Wikipedia offers a talk page to people so that they can facilitate communication relevant to their work on the project, not so that they can use it however they may please, nor as a free webhosting solution, nor as a vehicle for legal disputes (which, per policy, should be forwarded off-wiki to the foundation itself). In any case, if either of you like, I can be reached by Wikipedia's email system, or on the unblock-en-l mailing list. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any difficulty describing "it", "self evident" speaks for itself. If you don't see "it", then you are not looking. Let her know she can write you. I'm not a messenger. Telogen 03:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any time you want to begin describing the problem is a time I'm willing to listen; until then, you know how to reach me. – Luna Santin (talk) 03:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, I'd let her know that. Telogen 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]