User talk:Cabumbo

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Cabumbo, 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.

I appreciated your contributions to Huncote. Again, welcome! -- Heathhunnicutt 05:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huncote article edits

Your recent comtributions ([1]), have been removed. This kind of peurile and viscious nastiness is not welcome here. Please go elsewhere on the interwebs if you want to rant about villages (I hear Chavtowns.co.uk is just the place for Nu-Snobbery) kthnx--Speed Air Man 09:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)--Speed Air Man 16:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not rocket science

Please to be reading these WP:NPOV,WP:NPA,WP:CITE and WP:SIG; I think you will find them quite useful, kthnx --Speed Air Man 13:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So how should it have read?

From reading that it appears my only fault is to word it wrongly? How should I have included information about Huncote's past swinging scene and the drunken pot smoking antics of kids on the park? They are both after all things that happen or have happened in Huncote, and thus relevant to Huncote. Or is the problem that we should sweep all this under the carpet and hide it from people.

I repeat. Jobsworth.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cabumbo (talk • contribs) 13:59, 5 June 2007.

The information you want to include needs to verified by independant sources, adding things as fact just because you say they are the truth would be classed as Original research, which you will find, if you take the time to read the guidelines, is not allowed. I don't make the rules up here, so if you disagree with what is allowed/disallowed, you need to complain to the site's owners. Futhermore, I actually agree with some of what you have written and with a bit of help could be quite funny if it was written in a satirical way. As it was, it wouldn't even last 2 mins at encyclopediadramatic.com. There are plenty of sites on the interwebs that will cater for your "funny" articles (I did suggest Chavtowns.co.uk), so I find myself wondering why you must have your comments displayed at this site. And as for calling me a "jobsworth", well, thank you, I take that as a great compliment. --Speed Air Man 14:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right. So if I had read it in a book rather than seen it with my own eyes then it wouldn't have been "puerile nastiness" and could have been included. Well at least we've cleared that up then.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cabumbo (talk • contribs) 15:33, 5 June 2007.

The book (and information from it) would still need to be verifiable and NPOV, for example, written by a respected academic. You would find though, that such a person may include negative information but it would probably written in an objective way. There is a clear difference between objective constructive criticism and blatant nastiness, in other words, you can be critical with resorting to ad hominems--Speed Air Man 16:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From your first comment you said "I guarantee more people would rather they were there than wished they weren't." - might be an idea if you read this [2]--Speed Air Man 16:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cabumbo, yes if you had read it in a book, we could verify your claim. If you tell us you saw it with your own eyes, we have to take you at your word. Personally, I take you at your word, but Wikipedia is not one person, it is a project with rules. One of those rules is that we don't take anybody on their own word, ever. That is what Wikipedia - Original Research really boils down to. Another factor is that personal opinions are biased and convey a point of view, another defect that is inappropriate on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia - Neutral Point of View).

So, you yearn to publish the truth about Huncote, and I yearn for that truth to be published. Can you find any newspaper articles, police reports, or other published accounts of the social activities you described? If so, you can cite them in the article, and no tea-totalling fool may remove them afterward. Your victory will be ensured, as the truth shall set you and all of us free!

If I may add, it is good form to sign your comments on article talk pages. An easy way to do this is to sign off with four tilde marks ("~~~~") at the end of your remarks. The Wiki software will automatically convert this to a time-stamped signature, such as I am about to provide: Heathhunnicutt 20:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Cabumbo: I found some references to police priorities relating to the park. Surely, there must be some town newspaper or similar that you can reference. :) Heathhunnicutt 20:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]