User talk:CharlieOQ

CharlieOQ, you are invited to the Co-op!

Hi there! CharlieOQ, you are invited to The Co-op, a gathering place for editors where you can find mentors to help you build and improve Wikipedia. If you're looking for an editor who can help you out, please join us! I JethroBT (I'm a Co-op mentor)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 22:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kilgour–Matas_report

I suggest look at the changes between these versions https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kilgour%E2%80%93Matas_report&diff=654167391&oldid=653676293

I have deleted 5 references to Epoch Times (down from 7 to 2). I haven't deleted info that supports the CCP's view.Aaabbb11 (talk) 14:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about the views you deleted from Thomas Lum, Harry Wu, Glen McGregor and so on. These are important viewpoints that should be given representation (due weight) in the article. - CharlieOQ (talk) 14:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You removed all voices questioning the credibility of the report, leaving only the mention of CCP's own denial of the allegation. That doesn't sound like NPOV editing to me. -CharlieOQ (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Thomas Lum info on your version is a misrepresentation of what he wrote. Harry Wu was discussed on Falun Gong talk page. McGregor draws on Wu's statements and hasn't made his mind up. They are all individuals. None of them appear on Falun Gong#Organ harvesting. Lum is used for one reference on Falun Gong Aaabbb11 (talk) 17:04, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are individuals, but they are also notable individuals who did significant research into the allegations (esp. Thomas Lum and Harry Wu, who had the connections in Liaoning to carry out real investigations). Taken together, they represent a GROUP of experts who hold skeptical views towards the report and should be given due weight in the article. I stress again that these views together REPRESENT A VOICE, and shouldn't be simply regarded as isolated individuals.

Interestingly and ironically, in your version of the article, you retained views from Kirk C. Allison, Tom Treasure, Yosef Shalom Eliashiv and so on. ARE THEY NOT INDIVIDUALS?? You are clearly contradicting yourself. The fact is you are only selecting views from individuals who support your own belief, and discarding those who go against it. -CharlieOQ (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is discussion on the KM report talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kilgour%E2%80%93Matas_report I suggest you participate before reverting any more edits. Aaabbb11 (talk) 00:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to the Teahouse.

Hello CharlieOQ, thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! I want to invite you to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. I hope you see you there! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message. @ 02:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited American Institute of Physics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Melville. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CharlieOQ. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]