User talk:Theeagleman

Teilers (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)what do you think about imperialism?[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. 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. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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) 03:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Theeagleman! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Fullobeans (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

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 must 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) 16:10, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Gibson

Hi! I worked on the Chris Gibson article on various things, including renaming it to the usual format and then fixing the pages which linked to it. It appears you didn't know there's an election article about his campaign, and that's where some of that material belongs so it's all in one place. I noticed (via the WorldCat link I added) that's he's written other books, although I don't know how to find the ISBN numbers for them as the books aren't on Amazon. You might want to try to track them down and add to the Works section. Flatterworld (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the lede includes the major current position. For a US Rep, it's being a US Rep. For a candidate, it's being a candidate. We don't include both, as that's covered in the election section. The lede is intended to be brief. Flatterworld (talk) 18:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Chris Gibson. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Arbor832466 (talk) 17:23, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I added was not personal commentary but rather a brief summation of what my sources were saying about Gibson and his chances.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Chris Gibson (New York politician). During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 18:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Theeagleman (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was reverting only in response to a users unilateral blanking of a section, I also engaged in good faith discussion on the topic (I also stopped reverting when I realized we were edit warring-which is why the other editor's version is the current one). I have asked the other user repeatedly to improve rather than blank the article. Also I will note that while my recent edits have been heavily centered around Chris Gibson and his opponents articles this is because my time and Wikipedia expertise is limited and these are local candidates whose articles have received little attention and had either poorly made articles ( Scott Murphy, whose article was a mess) and Chris Gibson (New York politician) (who had no article at all) . I would also note that contrary to the other editors assertion my edits on Scott Murphy have improved the article and in no way highlighted or even added any negatives. I look foward to hearing from you! Theeagleman (talk) 18:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This was textbook editwarring on WP:BLP's. I don't have any position on the content of your additions, except to note that you may want to limit yourself to talk page discusssions until a firm consensus has been formed. Kuru (talk) 19:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.