User talk:WalAloe

Verifiable sources

Regarding the article on Bruce Lee, please note that an URL is insufficient. The full name of the author/provider must be tracked down for the information used or claimed. If it comes from a documentary, because not everyone can verify it directly, the precise quote and author's name should be provided, or else it can be considered non-verified information. Shawnc 10:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop re-adding unsourced entries. All information must be properly sourced. If an edit is considered controversial, you must use the discussion page to reach consensus with editors first; this is an official policy. Editors who break the 3 revert rule will be reported. Also kindly note that Wikipedia is not a fan site and all edits must not be written from a promotional point of view. Shawnc 06:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will go over the entries to see if each is verifiable. Others will be deleted. Shawnc 06:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one deleting sourced material. The documentaries are clearly valid, and yet you continue to delete the material it supports. And you also deleted sourced material from valid books and websites. What you are doing is tantamount to vandalism, see Wikipedia:Vandalism..Blanking Vandalism - "Removing all or significant parts of pages, or replacing entire established pages with one's own version without first gaining consensus. Sometimes important verifiable references are deleted with no valid reason(s) given in the summary" --WalAloe 06:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All properly sourced material can be kept. Several of the items in the list were in fact unverifiable statements taken from fan sites, so when your edits included such information, it unfortunately makes it possible for other editors to dismiss them. To avoid edits being considered vandalism, you are encouraged to activately particiate on discussions to reach consensus before making edits. I have gone over the list again and will be re-adding the proper entries. I suggest that we categorize and combine the entries into sections whenever possible, to provide a more coherent format. Again I must emphasize the official policy of NPOV; articles must not glorify the subject. Shawnc 07:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The format of a list doesn't need any change. The section obviously has been progressing with more feats being cited and certainly hasn't been stagnant so you should give more faith on the community to find those sources with a <citation needed> tag, instead of just deleting items. The items in question are not injurious or negative to the figure, so immediate deletion isn't warranted in my opinion.--WalAloe 10:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To elaborate:

The "striking speed from 3 feet away was five hundredths of a second": this has been stated incorrectly many times. The Jesse Glover quote gives "18-24 inches" which is at most 2 feet, not 3 feet.
The "lift a 310 lb barbell" statement appears to be taken from the Herb Jackson quote seen on the bruceleedivinewind.com site. "In addition, he had a 310lb Olympic barbell set, a bench press and some dumbbells, both solid and adjustable". This refers to a set of weights and is not equivalent to lifting a 310lb barbell.
The "throw grains of rice and cath them with chopsticks" claim is void of sources and sounds like a joke. Shawnc 07:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats fine, but you are deleted several cited feats, and even deleted the book citation of another feat. I'll find the sources for those in a few days.--WalAloe 10:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:EntertheDragonMirror.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Hi WalAloe!
We thank you for uploading Image:EntertheDragonMirror.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]