Talk:Al Gore 1988 presidential campaign

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

United States: Presidential elections Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Al Gore presidential campaign, 1988. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:30, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Perry

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

As much as I respect the former governor of Texas, I don't believe it's especially relevant to Gore's campaign that Rick Perry was involved in the Gore campaign during the primaries. I would suggest that the sentence be deleted. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 18:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Tollens (talk) 18:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to seek consensus for the changes, like you demanded I do. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 18:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Except you don't need to make a semi-protected edit request when the page is not even semi-protected in the first place. I would highly recommend reading through Wikipedia:Edit requests. Tollens (talk) 18:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not WP:WIKILAWYER -- I would regard what you're doing presently as Willfully misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions. I think you need to re-read Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before causing any further drama and not assuming WP:AGF. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 18:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How on earth is closing a request specifically designed for asking someone else to implement an uncontroversial change you cannot implement yourself, when you can in fact implement the change yourself, "willfully misinterpreting policy"? I have also at no point believed you are not editing in good faith, nor have I implied the opposite anywhere. Tollens (talk) 19:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution

Hi @The Herald! I see there's been a bit of a content dispute between us. I'm making the effort to make a comment now before things escalate any further, per the guidelines at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. So, why exactly do you disagree with the removal? I don't see how the mention of Rick Perry being involved with Gore's campaign is a particularly relevant part of the campaign, since he wasn't a major officeholder at the time. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 20:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. So as I was going through the edits and page history, I could see you removed the section with edit summary per talk page first, which was then reverted by Augmented Seventh. Thereafter, you removed the entire section again, with an edit summary commenting the relevance of the section and a so? tag. That's when I warned you regarding the removal of maintenance templates without resolution or discussion. You again reverted the edit (WP:3RR) and then proceeded to ask me to discuss here, which I reverted again and warned you again, which you again reverted (4th time in 24 hours). That is the current revision and I don't want to hit 3RR and hence I stopped.

Now regarding the content that was removed, per WP:BURDEN and WP:ONUS, you have to provide an explanation clearly when you are removing a perfectly cited sentence from the article and explain it on the talk page, which I see nowhere. So, please do that. If other editors agree and there is a consensus developed that says it should be removed, then it can be removed. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did provide an explanation. I directed you to the talk page, see the edit summary (Per talk page). The section I'm directing you can be found just above here at #Rick Perry. I see that I may have potentially been in violation of the three revert rule, however, and I apologize for that. 92.40.212.157 (talk) 09:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, the summary was directed to the talk page where no discussion about the topic was done. Only you accusing Tollens of not assuming good faith and quoting a cherry picked WP:WIKILAWYER points. None of that was constructive nor any consensus was reached for you to remove the material. I'll be restoring the edits back to the last good version, from where you can pick up, start a discussion for consensus in the talk page, or go for an RfC. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quoted directly from the talk page, I don't believe it's especially relevant to Gore's campaign that Rick Perry was involved in the Gore campaign during the primaries. I would suggest that the sentence be deleted.. I am not opening a second RfC within 24 hours since I've just opened one for a different matter on Talk:Al Gore. 92.40.212.157 (talk) 09:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't simply take out because you didn't like it or you feel it's irrelevant. You HAVE to obtain consensus before removing, which you still haven't. Therefore, obtain consensus before editing further from multiple IPs that are already range blocked. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith, and do not accuse me of sockpuppetry. I am using a shared IP address, which is public, and therefore has been blocked before due to issues of which I weren't involved, and thereby my address changes periodically. I never stated once that I wanted the sentence deleted because I didn't like it. I explained to you that I don't believe it's relevant because Perry was not a major officeholder at the time, and this endorsement would be equivalent to something minor like at the 2024 New Hampshire Republican presidential primary. 92.40.212.157 (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]