User talk:DtEW

University of California, Riverside

Thank you for contacting me. I've reviewed the article and made a few edits, which UCRGrad has already reverted. It seems that the article does have a slant against UCR; while User:UCRGrad has apparently taken the time to reference much of it, the overbearing negativity and undue weight create problems. (Not to mention some of the picture captions.) I would recommend an article Request for Comment to bring in plenty of outside opinions. If you would like me to take care of the RfC, just drop me a note. Cheers! Deltabeignet 06:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In an RfC, the most important thing would be to mention specific instances and examples to paint a broader picture; the band thing, for example, is a perfect example of misrepresentation. The point of the RfC is to bring in outside opinions and to try to form a better consensus; right now, although most observers have remarked that the article is biased, UCRGrad's dedication to the article overpowers that. This is probably the most complex edit conflict I've ever been involved with, but I think it can end well for all parties. Deltabeignet 04:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The RfC should probably be under Society, law, and sex as you suggested. I'm pretty busy at the moment, but I could do the RfC sometime this weekend if you'd like. Deltabeignet 20:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful about making accusations. Even if you're right that he's a slimeball hell-bent on introducing bias into this article, accusing him in particular of anything on the article's talk page (saying he manufactured an inconsistency, for instance) isn't really necessary or helpful. After all, it just gives him another excuse to become distracted from the rest of what you said, and someone who's reviewing the conversation might interpret it as unfounded uncivility. –Tifego^(t)_{06:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)}[reply]

909er/UCRGrad

Apparently 909er, who may or may not be UCRGrad, just decided to become a userpage vandal: [1]. You think it's getting to be time for an RFC? Maybe even an RFAr? szyslak (t, c, e) 06:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I made a user subpage for preparation (feel free to add to it), and I propose we use its talk page for any further discussion about this. –Tifego^(t)_{04:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)}[reply]