User talk:DSatYVR

Welcome!

Hello, DSatYVR, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

NDP page

Hello,

I understand the point that you're making, but I don't think your choice of language is appropriate. We have to present information in a neutral and objective manner; yours is skewed against the NDP, and the issue is not even one which is primarily associated with the party.

(You may want to change your wording on the Flaherty page too.) CJCurrie 06:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the requirement to present material in a neutral and objective manner, but all facts need to be presented around an issue. Feel free to add any cited information you think is relevant to the discussion. Is Wikipedia a platform for promoting political parties? No. Its a place to present a 'cited' history around an issue, whether it flatters the individual politician or not. Regards, DSatYVR 06:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The information should be presented, neutrally, on the Flaherty, Harper, and Conservative Party pages. I'm not certain it deserves any mention on the NDP page. CJCurrie 06:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Layton

Hello DSatYVR. I question whether your Feb. 16/07 addition to the Jack Layton page ("According to the Canadian Association of Income Trust Investors some 2.5 million Canadian investors were effected by the change in Income Trust Policy") is really necessary. The page is about Jack Layton, and the article already notes his support for the change in the tax law. Why is it necessary to top it up with more stats on the income trust reversal, information that probably should be, or is, in some other article? Just my thoughts... Que-Can 20:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to show the number of everyday Canadians who are affected by the NDP support of this policy. Is there a better way to show this? I'm open to suggestions. I've asked for revision suggestions for several days on the Talk:Jack_Layton page with no response. I'd also like to insert Sentence 2. Basically showing cause and effect. Regards, DSatYVR 05:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Carney and WP:BLP

I probably cut some content that would be very useful for readers to know. But it does have to be sourced to reliable secondary sources (not blogs, even blogs of well respected people and organizations). WP:BLP is very strict about this. --Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CAITI

DSatYVR, if you don't mind, I would like to ask you a direct question. Are you affiliated with the Canadian Association of Income Trust Investors? --Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, but I'm very interested in how the Conservative government developed their policies on Income Trusts. DSatYVR (talk) 05:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder how much the liberal party is paying you

As i look through your history of edits, it is nothing but negative and often obvious partisan smears against the NDP or the Conservatives. Of course all your edits to liberal pages are generally positive or grammatical edits. So my question to you is are you begin payed directly by the federal liberals or just a volunteer in some local liberal riding?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.161.203 (talk) 01:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no affiliation with the Liberal Party nor am I paid by the Liberal Party. I strive for accuracy in my edits and back them up with credible citations. If that scares you than too bad. If this is the best shot you got than you have nothing anonymous user 99.254.161.203. Do you work for or are you affiliated with Gary Goodyear? DSatYVR (talk) 05:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a huge difference between striving for accuracy and blantet partisan editing. If you really cared about acuracy there is many liberal scandals which you could be working on updating the numerous liberal pages. Instead you bring in artificial scandals to NDP and Conservative pages. You also word all your sentences to even make the most mundane detail seem negative. This is hardly "My best shot" whatever that means over the internet. Just a simple question since your edits are so one sided on the liberal side. You can hardly call your edits factual when you cite liberal.ca as backup to your claims and omit certain facts that would tell a completely different version of the story u are pushing. Not very hard to just go to liberal.ca look up all the smears and then go to as many NDP and Conservative sites and then smear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.161.203 (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are not accurate at all, a basic example is on gary goodyears page you stated "conservatives have been filibustering the committee for HOURS ON END" that is obvious partisan spin by saying hours on end you are giving what should be a neutral article a negative spin. You could have just as easily said "conservatives have been filibustering the committee". Oh and i live in Kitchener and have done a small amount of volunteer work for Karen Redman in the past before she was party whip. Although i am highly disappointed with the current liberals in power you won't see me smearing any of their pages. BTW, oh wow you nailed me with my blantet/blatant typo therefore you discredit my whole argument you sure got me.... Anyways i don't want to waste any more of my time arguing with some low level liberal party hack who is so embarrassed by his party that he has to come on to wikipedia and try to bring political spin to a place that should remain neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.161.203 (talk) 01:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Mark Carney

An article that you have been involved in editing, Mark Carney, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Carney. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Eastmain (talk) 12:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Canadian listeriosis outbreak

Please don't directly copy text from sources. Even if you cite the source, you should always rewrite material in order to avoid plagiarism.-Wafulz (talk) 15:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oceanic Weather

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. HkCaGu (talk) 02:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Townsville Airport. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Bidgee (talk) 21:57, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Do not readd the links to the articles. If you want a weather link on Ob's from the airports, use http//:www.bom.gov.au instead. Bidgee (talk) 22:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http:www.bom.gov.au doesn't work friend. A user name and password is required to access TAF/METAR information.DSatYVR (talk) 23:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TAF/METAR information is useless to the general community, Observations pages such as like this one are more useful to the general community then TAF/METAR which is really for aviation (there is a public user name and password for the information). Bidgee (talk) 23:06, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation weather links are allowed on all American and Canadian airports which have a co-located weather observation station. Go ahead and check. DSatYVR (talk) 23:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Urm so? These are Australian airports not American or Canadian, and have given you a accessible observation page. The link you used is infact a blog. Bidgee (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infact it shouldn't be used as it fails WP:ELNO #11 (even if it uses information from the NOAA). Just because it exists on other articles doesn't mean that it is excepted on those articles, it is likely that the links on those articles are unchallenged as they have been missed. And again Observations pages such as like this one should be used. Bidgee (talk) 23:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly you're ignoring my comments and concerns. Again the blog fails WP:ELNO #11, even if it doesn't have "personal opinion is expressed". Bidgee (talk) 00:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helena Guergis

DSatYVR, please stop edit warring and discuss on the talk page. As you probably know, you could be blocked even if you do not technically violate WP:3RR. If you and the other editor are not able to come to an agreement, you need to follow steps of dispute resolution. Thanks. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]