User talk:Becos

Welcome!

Hello, Becos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Dr Debug (Talk) 23:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you the user...

Who left a long anonymous note under "Reversions of anonymous wholesale hype" in Brooklyn Technical High School Discussion page? Just asking. - Tenebrae 03:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting your wholesale changes, notified Admin

CC of posting to Admin:

User:Becos (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) appears to be yet another sock puppet of IPs 130.91.45.219, 130.91.44.181 and 130.91.45.232. He continues to make roughly the same wholesale changes to whitewash Brooklyn Technical High School and may be the anonymous user leaving long, self-justifying messages on the Brooklyn Tech Discussion page about why he is leaving such non-NPOV puffery as

With state-of-the-art computer classrooms, its location in a popular neighborhood, and the support of its alumni, Brooklyn Technical High School is poised for greatness to come as we begin this new century.

and

After 13 years, the school was ready for new leadership and new ideas. While longevity is certainly good for stability, in a changing world there needs to be new ideas.

and consistently removing quoted New York Times, NY Daily News and other periodicals' investigative findings about the principal, who retired Feb. 6 due to corruption (confirmably requiring him to repay the Bd. of Ed. $19,000, one of the many facts this vandal keeps deleting). I'm putting this on the User:Becos page for notification. Thanks. Look back over the history of these changes -- and of the new-user status, and of the fact he's edited nothing else -- and you'll see a pattern that makes one suspect cronyism or the ex-principal himself. - Tenebrae 03:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion on the Talk page of the article

And your addition is not neutral. So don't keep on reinserting it. Work it out with the other user, because you are putting in a completely different story. Dr Debug (Talk) 16:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning about Brooklyn Technical High School

Find consensus on the talk page of the article instead of reinserting the same material again and again. You have been told on many places not to do it, yet you continue to reinsert the same non-neutral material.

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dr Debug (Talk) 19:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remove parts of other people's talk pages.

A talk page is not a place to remove parts of the discussion. You already made that statement and I think it is very relevant, because the content dispute is going nowhere because you want to insert your own story overwriting the stories of other people. But removing parts of a conversation on somebody else's talk page is not done. You are seriously pushing the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Dr Debug (Talk) 01:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you take your content dispute to Third Opinion

Because of the likelyhood that you will invite other people and even though I tried to intervene it seems that I am ignored.

You can file a request for Third Opinion at Wikipedia:Third opinion and you can use Talk:Brooklyn Technical High School to discuss any and all changes together with a volunteer who wishes to intervene. Dr Debug (Talk) 01:35, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And changes does not mean pasting in whole documents or making long essays. I suggest a paragraph by paragraph approach with comments limited to a few sentences without personal attacks and other irrelevant talk. Just stick to the facts and say what you think should be changed or added paragraph by paragraph and work for a consensus that way. At least that's my opinion of the matter. Dr Debug (Talk) 01:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus ballot-stuffing

Announcing that you're going to get friends to flood the Talk page is not going to help you add non-NPOV hype to the Brooklyn Tech site and turn it into a boosterism page.

McCaskill is part of Tech's recent history the way many other individuals mentioned are part of its history. One cannot talk about an institution without talking about individuals who have affected ti significantly, for right or for wrong.

I'm curious in that you say "right now McCaskill or supporters of him could care less what an easily edited encyclopedia online will say." How do you know McCaskill? Or are you conjecturing and assuming, the way you assume that no one editing the Tech article has "never stepped into this building." I again must wonder about your claim of being a professor, and about the disciple in which you received you degree, since the scientific method doesn't seem at play here. How exactly did you ascertain no other editor has "stepped into this building"?

I say this not to needle you, but to respectfully request real answers. The reason I do so is that it is a questionable thing to make unsupported claims about other people. You have made many, many accusations of people's motivations, agendas, etc., when other editors have done nothing more than present documented, confirmable, verifiable facts. If that is "hijacking" the site in your view, I'm afraid that's a unusual stance that appears to validate the agenda you have clearly and plainly stated: That you want to "celebrate" (your word) Tech.

An encyclopedia is not the place for that. Please understand. -- Tenebrae 02:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tenebrae you know more about me than I know about you. I still don't know your association with this article. You know what institution I am from, what institution I am a part of, and what I care about. I still do not know any of this information concerning you. You keep attacking me as being connected to McCaskill; this is the most hurtful statement you can make. I swear by any principle you hold dear that I am not McCaskill, and that the only reason I care about this article is because of Tech. I am not stuffing the ballot. It is obvious that not enough Technites are on this site because if they were this article would not look like this. I know in the bottom of my heart if I had contacted people asking to join this discussion and what should be on here, that this site would be voted best school site, because there is no reason for my rival high school, Stuyvesant, to be better. The only reason it is better is because everyone who contributes is a Stuyvesant alum. I do not know why Brooklyn Tech alumni are not writing here, but I am sure if I got the word out, it would be far from ballot stuffing. Ballot stuffing is what occurs when you coerce people into acting a certain way. Unlike what is going on on this site, I do not have to coerce anyone. I believe that is all I have to say. Unless you tell me how you are connected to the school, what do you think about my bio for McCaskill addition, and for the addition of this materical on the NYC DOE, then I can certify that you are hiding facts that you think are central but wish to ignore. However, I have come to realize that I would not want more alumni to be involved on this. I believe their efforts can be most appreciated in another capacity. I would hate to draw more attention for this site then it already needs. Thank you. Becos 04:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it encyclopedic

And please stop your attempts at boosterism. This is NOT a place to make Tech "look good", however well-intentioned that may be. A principal with a 14-year reign is significant, as are the controversies surrounding him.

I'm sorry if that offends you as an alumnus, but certainly you understand that feelings have nothing to do with the entry. The entry is about documented facts — and controversies require especially detailed documentation.

Add and polish — that's the Wiki way — but please do not try to erase concrete facts that may embarrassed your beloved alma mater, or try to whitewash tne entry out of some misplaced sense of school pride. This is an encyclopedia. It's actually better not to have this entry written by alumni, who may be (not saying necessarily are) more biased than a dispassionate researcher. I believe you'd agree that's a reasonable statement.

Also, please stop assuming personal things about other editors. Despite your statement, I don't know anything about you. I only know what you claim. And who we are does not matter, except insofar as it may affect our objectivity. My entries, and those of other editors, have involved very well-documented facts. I know I would welcome any additional responsible editor who values objectivity and does not have a personal agenda. - Tenebrae 05:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will stop all this foolery immediately and will work together for a better solution. I wrote to Dr Debug and told him that what I actually want is for the whole article to mirror the success that the other rival NYC schools. I hope we can look at those sites as what should truly be our inspiration while keeping in mind the issues that have plagued the school. Becos 05:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Things are a bit hectic over at the helpdesk with us trying to clear the backlog before that system is changed, so I haven't checked out the problems here in detail, but it looks like consensus is being reached. -- Jeandré, 2006-02-12t07:39z

I would be glad — if it's the consensus of others here — to move that principal's unique era to its own section and out of the chronological section in which it now resides. I'll post your suggestion and my response on the Tech Discussion page. Also, and I know this is because you're new to Wikipedia, please remember to sign your posts (using a dash and four tildes), so as to properly ID oneself and save others from having to look up the poster on the History page.

And very seriously: Thanks. I'm looking forward to moving forward. — Tenebrae 21:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Brooklyn Tech talk page

I know you're new and there's a lot to absorb. The best place for this discussion really would be the Brookklyn Tech discusson page rather than my user discussion page. My most recent response is there Thanks for understanding! — Tenebrae 04:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 07:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]