User talk:Avel2

Ok. Thanks. I will review it later.

Antoine

Hi, again

Check the Norman Lowell page again and let me know what you think. I spent some time finding links and added them to the article. I also deleted some biased info such as the "pro-illegal immigrant" thing you mentioned and the fact that the party has an "ever increasing number of adherents," an unsourced and indeed biased statement.

Let me know if you still think the article is biased, or edit it yourself, but please maintain neutrality, which is what I am trying to do. Thanks.

Drew88 09:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have made an edit that could be regarded as defamatory. Please do not restore this material to the article or its talk page. If you restore this material to the article or its talk page once more, you will be blocked for disruption. See Blocking policy: Biographies of living people. Drew88 14:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell are you talking about, well-documented?? Do you realize that you moved the page Norman Lowell to page called "Maltese racism"?? Do you realize that when your changes were reverted, you deleted the whole page? What the hell is so well documented about this?

Drew88 06:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Vella, thanks for letting me know who you are. Anyway, if you're going to edit the article Norman Lowell make sure there are no weasel words and/or any unsourced material and/or any POV statements such as:

"naive young men"
"offensive outburts"
"lower classes"
"offended many viewers" - says who? Many people are offended by Bush, but do you see it mentioned on the wikipedia page? No.
"never officially banned" - it never stated in the article that he was official banned. And a citation is currently required.
changing "illegal" to "irregular": that's a weasel word.
quoting one biased journalist as if it's going to justify anything. I could very well quote a White Nationalist praising Lowell, but it won't prove anything.
the Avemelita link is broken.
"several pejorative words were used to describe Jews." The words were quoted, read the article by Lowell.

Wikipedia is not a place to view your opinion. Perhaps it would be in your interest to start a blog.

Also, when editing, use the current version of the article. I had deleted the quotations on the Norman Lowell page and when you edited you inserted them again.

Drew88 06:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reasons for the reversion are stated above. To answer your question (for the benefit of the admins who will be looknig through my contributions): "Philanthropic" is indeed a weasel word because it disguises the true nature of the NGO. Perhaps it would be in your interest to start a page on the NGo to disprove this. The term "racialist" is also a weasel word, but in the article it is clearly stated that it is Norman Lowell who claims to be one and is not my or anyone else's POV.

Drew88 07:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Defamatory POV

Who says that the "true nature" of NGOs which work with immigrants is to aid illegality.? These NGOs include the Jesuit Refugee Service and the UNHCR. Neither of these NGOs is in favour of illegality and both are recognised by the Maltese Government, the European Union and the UN as bona fide philanthropic organisations. Hence it is defamatory to call them pro-illegal immigrant.

Just in case...

I responded to your mediation case that you filed about Drew88... but I never got a reply...

Check it out. Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-25 Norman Lowell

Thanks for using The Mediation Cabal. --The Prophet Wiz ard of the Cray on Cake 04:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't reply soon, I'm afraid I'll have to close the case due to inactivity. I'll wait a little bit more, but I'll be closing otherwise. --The Prophet Wiz ard of the Cray on Cake 07:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 15:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]