User talk:Richmex2010

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons. Thank you. Ckatz^chat _spy 02:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Larry King. Thank you. AnturiaethwrTalk 03:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC) Hi, i am surprised that you would class the public UK TV NEWS STATION CHANEL 4 NEWS as being a poor source of information. C4 news, not to be confused with other, lesser sources of news, is as inpeccable as the BBC. I watch it, online, daily, www.channel4news.com You should try it out, and would find it more satisfying and accurate than any US news network. Samira Ahmed stated that the Larry King Show was on the verge of cancellation, due to falling ratings. the viewer numbers for recent months were shown on screen. The figures were not disputed by cnn. Samira further ascerted that cnn were in talks with Piers Morgan, former newspaper reporter, and chat show host. Cnn did not dispute this news. Neither did King. As King is as obviously imperfect as the majority of us, i think you have erred on the side of caution by removing my edit. Additionaly, evidence has shown over the past 25 or so years that channel 4 news is not a poor source of information. You cannot ascert what you are saying, which is, surely unknowingly, an insult to anchor Jon Snow and the staff at c4 news. This matter also reminds me of the case of complaints from readers and contributors about the wiki decision to remove, repeatedly, facts regarding the assault by Christian Bale on his sister and mother, which are corroborated by the London Police and BBC. Also, having recently come across a celebrity name i was not familiar with, i was extremely disappointed that the tiny page for Tori Black included her first onscreen anal penetration(s). Is this relevant to anyone, other than perverts? Is it a career milestone? Please let me know if your decision stands, as i do not wish to get into contention with you, over this issue. thanks.Richmex2010 (talk) 22:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In your edit to Larry King, you referred only to a news channel, and not to, say, a specific broadcast or report. The purpose of citing material is to allow readers to verify for themselves what Wikipedia says, which is not possible if the reference is that broad. This is particularly important in putting forth potentially controversial claims, such as the implicit claim that King and CNN are attempting to mislead the public as to his reasons for stepping down.

In short, I did not mean to impugn the source, but rather the reference to it. I see that the template I used above refers to the page WP:RS, which is not quite applicable in this situation; I did not know that when I used it, and I apologize for the miscommunication. A better page for you to read would be WP:CITE.

On another topic, I note that you've been signing your contributions in some articles. That isn't necessary, since anyone can see who added what to an article; signatures are really only meant for talk pages like this one. AnturiaethwrTalk 03:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for your polite reply.I have noticed that on the Steven Seagal page, this has become a forum for internicine grief and abuse.

My recollection is that i did quote UK´s Channel 4 news, but i don´t want to argue that point.

It may be that as a busy ´speed reader´ you missed it, or had some distraction. So, if you don´t object, i will add the information, quoting the source in detail. I think it is silly that fragile ego´s mean an invention is used to cover the truth, which in this case is just a business fact of life. Now John Pilger, a hero of mine, being quoted as referring to President Obamas as a ´glossy uncle tom´! That made me cringe. I was surprised that the edit wasn´t amended to cruel insult, or he expressed a racist opinion of him. But our John is a passionate, caring man, like myself, and wears his heart on his sleave.