User talk:Tdl1060: Difference between revisions

User Tdl1060 has deleted information about Illinois State Bill Mitchell's August 29, 2003 DUI arrest. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Mjv111 (talk • contribs)

In answer to your question, I removed the information on Bill Mitchell (politician) earlier because you had not cited sources. --Tdl1060 17:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Patrick O'Malley

Patrick O'Malley is a Chicago politician, because as a state senator, he represented a portion of the city of Chicago. 75.2.243.187 06:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Roskam

Could you please discuss the issue on the talk page rather than engaging in edit war? — goethean ॐ 16:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Tim Walberg

• Please don't remove tags without either sourcing the article better or discussing on the Talk Page.--Isotope23 12:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Kevin Edward White

This was a non-notable biography as per the criteria set out in WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 21:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

TPM as a source

You were probably right to remove that, but IMO for the wrong reason (namely, that it was superfluous to the article ... the earlier effusion is all that matters, and it came direct from the source). Per this discussion, I tend to feel that TPM, which is run somewhat like a regular media outlet by a a notable individual whose work has been published elsewhere before his blogging, and which regularly cites its other sources, can be considered reliable. Daniel Case 02:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Roskam

I suggest that you do not endorse the edits of indefinitely blocked users such as you did here. — goethean ॐ 16:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ramsey, Godsey, Davis, Mumpower

RE: Ron Ramsey, Steve Godsey, David Davis (Tennessee politician), Jason Mumpower >>>Your post at User talk:4.88.70.24"Could you please discuss the issue rather than engaging in edit war?--Tdl1060 18:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)"

Tdl1060, seeing how this is your first post to Talk before repeatedly deleting revelant information pertaining to several politicians from Northeast Tennessee and their ties to prominent pharmaceutical businesses (e.g. King and Leitner Pharma, or SJ Strategic Investments) located within their own counties (i.e.: Sullivan County) and districts (1st U.S. House of Representatives District, Tennessee) , I would be glad to discuss the issue with someone from Illinois as you appear to be.

While your user page indicates that you take some pride in having "...over a ton of edits", I think that your hacking through the section "Political connection to Altace, pharmaceutical industry" the wikipages for Ron Ramsey et al is completely unwarrented. You might have noticed that these individuals are politicians and that the materials that you repeatedly removed from their individual pages provided the details of those stated specific connections to both Altace and the repsective pharma businesses.

And while you are suggesting that you cuts would be better suited at pharma pages, you neglected to make the good-faith editing step by seeing that the information and references that you had repeatedly deleted were actually posted to those pages that you suggested while making your edits.

I do not believe that your repeated edits at these pages can be attributed to any action other than vandalism.

That's fine that the info is already on the articles on the pharmaceuticals but if the readers want to see more backround on them all the need to do is click on the links. Wikipedia can't have the backround of every issue or company exhaustively layed out on an article in which it may be mentioned, that's what internal links are for.--Tdl1060 19:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to David Davis (Tennessee politician). It may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. disruptive editing by Tdl1060 4.88.58.217 23:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Ron Ramsey. It may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. disruptive editing by Tdl1060 4.88.58.217 23:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Jason Mumpower. It may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. disruptive editing by Tdl1060 4.88.58.217 23:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Steve Godsey. It may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. disruptive editing by Tdl1060 4.88.58.217 23:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This page is an official policy on the English Wikipedia. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community of people interested in building a high-quality encyclopedia in a spirit of mutual respect. Therefore, there are certain things that Wikipedia is not.

== What Wikipedia is not ==

=== Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia ===

Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. This means that there is no practical limit to the number of topics we can cover, or the total amount of content, other than verifiability and the other points presented on this page.

There is a feasible limit for individual article sizes that depends on page download size for our dial-up readers and readability considerations for everybody (see Wikipedia:Article size). After a point, splitting an article into separate articles and leaving adequate summaries is a natural part of growth for a topic (see Wikipedia:Summary style). Some topics are covered by print encyclopedias only in short, static articles, and since Wikipedia requires no paper we can give more thorough treatments, include many more relevant links, be more timely, etc.

This also means you don't have to redirect one topic to a partially equivalent topic that is of more common usage. A "See also" section stating that further information on the topic is available on the page of a closely related topic may be preferable.

4.129.65.223 15:25, 10 February 2007 (UTC) 4.129.65.223 17:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)