User talk:1qaz1qaz1qaz

January 2010

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Diana Gabaldon. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Love dance of scorpions (talk) 06:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

My posting was called vandalism

I tried to post an update to a page I am a fan of. The edit was deleted and I was told it appeared to vandalism. There as a link to"talk" to the user who removed my edit. I tried the link but must say even though I have been a profession in the computer industry for over thirty years and am familiar with most systems I bump into, I could not figure out who to accomplish the simple task of conversing with the user who was removing the edit I was posting.

I understand some content is "protected" I did not have any idea it was at a level this deep. If my post is disputable, there ought to be a mechanism for even the most rudimentary discussion on the dispute. Did I miss something?

By the way the edit was on the Author Diana Gabaldon's page. I am a big fan. I own all of the books she wrote on her first series and loved them. When I saw her new series, I wasn't sure but figured I would give it a try. I was disgusted by the complete switch from a writing style that was romantic and perhaps more graphic than I cared for to a style that was suddenly focusing the theme of the book on a gay Soldier having graphic sex with his step-brother. As a fan,if I had read that comment, I would have saved myself the money, time and the experience of trying to find my way through the book hoping it was just a brief part of some key to a bigger story.

I realize my opinions are not politically correct, but I was careful not to be either mean spirited, vulgar or offensive in any way. Unless my thought are offensive. If that is the case, free speech and tolerance are dead, and wikiapedia is the shovel being used to bury them. I do hope I am mistaken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1qaz1qaz1qaz (talk • contribs) 06:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Instructions on discussing a matter of dispute can be found at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. However, your content was, in fact, unencyclopedic. Wikipedia only publishes neutral content. That is the content that can be backed up by reliable, secondary sources. An editor's personal opinions or observations are not permitted in an article. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think it was harsh of User:Love dance of scorpions to describe your edits as 'vandalism': I think he/she is breaking the Wikipedia guideline "assume good faith". But there is no doubt that your edits did not meet Wikipedia's requirements, specifically they were not neutral, and they were not backed up by reliable sources. If you think that there is something more at stake than your personal opinion, I urge you to begin a discussion at Talk:Diana Gabaldon (pick the '+' at the top to start a new section, and give it a suitable title: then you can reach agreement with other editors over how the issue should be resolved. Remember to sign your post on talk pages by ~~~~.

You could have begun a discussion with Love dance of scorpions the same way: pick the 'history' tab at the top of Diana Gabaldon, find an edit by that user, and pick the 'talk' next to their name. That will take you to the user's talk page, and you can begin a new section by picking '+'. --ColinFine (talk) 08:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Colin, the tab to click at the top would be labelled "new section". You see a "+" because you enabled a gadget to make it look smaller. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, perhaps you are correct, but I do believe that while my edits may have reflected my perspective they were in fact factual and descriptive of the new series. The author in famous for her first series which was based on a concept of romance and time travel. Her fans would assume that she was writing in that genre. The fact is her new series is follows a new theme. I have seen a number of Wikipedia entries that detail authors series content and found the information very helpful. I suppose if I wrote the edit in a blander style, it would have been fine by Wikipedia standards. However, I don't think any edit I posted would have been accepted. That is in my mind unacceptable. Wikipedia's strength is the community.

Thanks also for the tip on signing posts with ~~~~ 1qaz1qaz1qaz (talk) 20:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Saw your post in the Help Desk

Try Wikinfo. They allow POV's (points of view) and OR's (original reseach).
:-D
Civic Cat (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2010 (UTC)