Talk:Wassenaar

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wassenaar article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Netherlands

	Netherlands portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles
	This article is supported by Dutch municipalities task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

Wardlet - You are correct, I do not own the page. Rather, the edits I made were to improve the quality of the article, as I saw it, and also to comply with Wikipedia's policies. Glowing adjectives such as "charming," "desirability," and "pleasant" give the article the feel of an advertising brochure. While I love Wassenaar as much as you do, that is not Wikipedia's purpose - check out WP:NPOV. Also, the message you left on your own talk page was rather rude and assumed that I acted in bad faith, whereas on Wikipedia we should assume good faith. Furthermore, if you check the edit history carefully, you will see that half of what you reverted was me correcting my own bad grammar from when I translated portions of this page from Dutch months ago.

I assume that you are a relatively new user, so your unfamiliarity with Wikipedia's policies is certainly understandable, but I have a long track record as a helpful, constructive editor and I do not appreciate being reverted unilaterally and then told off.

Take care, NetherlandishYankee (talk) 22:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yet you are quite happy to unilaterallty dictate what style is acceptable. Do with the article what you wish. You clearly live for Wikipedia and nothing else.

I suspect you were bullied at school. Correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.138.226.49 (talk) 00:45, 7 June 2008‎ (UTC)[reply]

I am not "unilaterally dictating what style is acceptable." I am working in accordance with long-held, consensus-built Wikipedia policies. If you choose to ignore them, that's your prerogative, but it's liable to get you blocked - as is blanking another user's comments from a talk page, which is a strict no-no. For the record, I did not delete your addition, but merely parsed to make it more encyclopedic. For what it's worth, I think your edit, minus the POV adjectives, is quite worthwhile and does contribute to the article. However, I have given concrete reasons for altering your edit, while you have done nothing but viciously attack me, which means in addition to violating WP:NPOV and WP:AGF, you have now also violated Wikipedia: No personal attacks. Since you have not seen fit to explain your reversions, I will treat further reverts of my edits as vandalism and report them as such. Please reconsider your actions.

Oh, and by the way, no, I don't "live for Wikipedia." I live for the Lord Jesus Christ first, and for music second. Wikipedia is merely a small pastime of mine. If you wish to think otherwise, that's your problem. You wouldn't be the first. I'm sorry you have taken a disliking to me.

Pax Christi,

NetherlandishYankee (talk) 01:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]