User talk:Hawkmc
Ampat, I made the change as you suggested, although I still think that a VC investment should be in the ownership section.
Hawkmc, it has been two months since you claimed that the financing information you listed under "ownership" was in the correct place. If you still have no evidence of that claim, please remove this information from the 'ownership' section and, as I suggested before, place it under "financing". Just because someone helps with financing, there is NOT an automatic transfer of any portion of the ownership. Shoot, I have given financial backing to MANY different entities, NONE of which I gained any owenrship in - Things here have to be verifiable, IIRC. Verify it or remove it.
Ampat, for the record, your changes were reverted by User:Nima_Baghaei on March 12, and TWICE by User:Kenyon on March 17.
Hawkmc, I did indeed make serious mistakes in my first efforts here, and ONE person (not other contributors as you claim) corrected me on that. Since that initial mistake, I have done my best to get some balance into this article, which read like an advertisement written by Tinsley. You still have not supported your claim that this financing has any bearing on ownership, and until you support that, financing information should not be in the ownership section. It is quite possible to get financing without giving up any ownership in Reunion.com. Tinsley is certainly not without other assets which could have been involved. When I removed the financing information from the ownership section, I even pointed out that you might want to start a section on financing, since it is not necessarily tied to ownership. Unless you can establish the amount of interest that was transfered, you really should change this. I will not change it again, as you obviously have far more time to spend here changing it back, so it is a wasted effort to correct it myself.
Ampat, you have not done your very best to get some balance - you have done your very best to slant the article negatively. For example, I spent a fair amount of time researching and writing about the funding Reunion.com just received, and then you just deleted it all - even though it is both factual and relevant to the article. You say I have fought you tooth and nail, when all I have done was try to ensure that the information you (and I) contribute is supported, in appropriate sections, with proper attribution from reliable sources. And if you look back at your talk page, other wikipedia contributors were undoing your edits, especially at first when you started deleting big chunks of the article. At the end of the day, the section you created about issues remains in tact in the article, in terms of weight on the page it's a big section, and it outlines the items that you have issues with - I think that is both fair and appropriate. In reality there shouldn't be "balance" of positive and negative viewpoints because there shouldn't be any viewpoints; Wikipedia is just supposed to provide dispassionate facts. --User:Hawkmc 19 April 2007 (c)
OK, here I am at user talk. When I saw this welcome message, I assumed you should get this user talk page started for yourself, but since you told me to come here, here I am.
Hawk, I have done my very best to get some balloance into this article on Reunion.com, and you have fought tooth and nail with every single change I have tried to make. You insist on including lots of rosy stuff, and fight everything that is negative at all. Why? Do you work for this company?
--Terry 23:20, 18 April 2007 (t·c)
(moved from user page)
Hawk, all that financial information did not deal with 'ownership'. Consider creating a new section on 'financing'. - Thank you for the external links article; according to it, external links are needed when more material is available on the link than has been used in the article. Since this is certainly the case with the LA BBB report, I restored the external link to their report. - I believe the reunion.com article is becomming once again an advertising piece for this company. Please review WP:Undue_weight#Undue_weight. --Terry (t·c)
Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
[edit]
|
Image copyright problem with Image:KMCIMainEntrance.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:KMCIMainEntrance.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
The article Algonquin Experience Camp has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- This camp can't even be verified.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 06:16, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Jack Donohue Public School for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Donohue Public School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.