User talk:Splenda-luva

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you. Sarah 12:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Splenda-luva! 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! MBisanzBot (talk) 00:48, 23 April 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

Hiberniantears 12:53, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Menino

Please do not add original research to Wikipedia. Please read the link above before making similar edits. Hiberniantears 13:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to the Menino article may be well intentioned, but you are repeatedly adding uncited speculation to the article, despite my reverts. Please be advised of the Wikipedia:3RR rule, as it is approaching. You should also be advised that your edits appear to be vandalism. Hiberniantears 14:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Hello, I thought you may want to know that when you post a message to another user, you post it on their talk page. In this edit here, you accidentally posted your message on Sarah's user page. Thank you. Acalamari 17:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, please do not remove comments from your talk page, or the talk page of another editor, as you did with your page, as well as User:Sarah. Hiberniantears 20:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your messages

Sarah,

I'm assuming that you did not read my post on your talk section. I added a citation to prove that my assertations were legitimate. You are from Australia. I have lived in Boston for my entire life. As the Massachusetts Political Director of the Harvard College Democrats, I liaise with the staff of these men and as a very active member of the Boston political community, I have been to many events, read numerous articles, and have even personally spoken to some of these men about their political ambitions. I am quite serious about this. I think people deserve to know, if they choose, who will potentially be the next mayor of Boston. I'm not doing this to mess around, I think you should take me seriously.

Splenda-luva — Preceding unsigned comment added by Splenda-luva (talk • contribs)

Actually, I didn't see your first message because you left it off the top of the page. When you leave messages for people, please leave them at the bottom of the page and please sign them by typing four tildes (~~~~).

Anyway, I did not remove your edits to the article, they were removed by User:Hiberniantears who I see has explained to you above why your edits are not suitable for Wikipedia and why s/he removed them. That I live in Australia is absolutely irrelevant. I am quite capable of reading edits and determining whether or not they conform with policy. A person doesn't have to live in Boston to do this. Please review some of the links you have been given already because you seem to have a mistaken view of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we only publish what third party reliable sources have already reported. Your edits to the Tom Menino article contained editorialising and original research and are therefore unsuitable for inclusion. Thanks, Sarah 23:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im sorry, but the comment you left on my talk page was quite rude. I have tried being nice about this whole thing but it obviously doesnt seem to be working. The fact that you live in Australia is relivent as you know nothing about this topic. I do, and the information I wrote was correct and NOT original research as i have citations. I am new to wikipedia so im sorry if i didnt sigh this whole thing right. Oh and I add, that you must have no life if all you do is sit on wikipedia and change back things that YOU do not think are appropriate. Splenda-luva 20:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, please. As I said in my previous message, I did not revert your edits to the Menino article. I reverted your vandalism to other articles (Boston, Massachusetts, Scientology and celebrities and Buncrana), but that's it, I have never even touched the Menino article. Please review these diffs and you'll see that you are taking this up with the wrong person: [1], [2], [3] HOWEVER, I do completely support and agree with Hiberniantears's reversion of your edits because they are simply not appropriate for Wikipedia. For example, we do not independently determine whether candidates are "serious potential candidates" or whether 67% is "mere" or whether it is "unsettling". These things violate WP:NPOV and WP:NOR and inject editorial POV. You claim your edits do not contain original research because you cited a source, however, your source is simply election statistics and it does not support your editorial comments, opinions and conclusions in any way at all. As for your "no life" comments, if you are incapable of making your case without resorting to ad hominem attacks, then please don't bother making it at all. Once again, the fact that I live in Australia is absolutely irrelevant. A person does not have to live in Boston to look at edits and determine whether or not they conform to our policies and guidelines. Furthermore, it is ignorant to assume that just because a person is from another country, that they "know nothing about" these issues or that you automatically know more because you live locally. As for your claim that you've "tried being nice" but it "doesn't seem to be working," ad hominem personal attacks are not nice, but regardless, being nice (or not) does not change the fact that the paragraph you are trying to add is not suitable for Wikipedia. You don't seem to understand that the problem is not whether or not your edits contain facts, the problem is you are trying to inject editorial comment, original research and point of view into the article. Sarah 06:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I might add, Hiberniantears, the person who reverted your edits to the Menino article, is from Boston him/herself and therefore, I assume, qualified in your eyes to judge the validity of your edits. Thanks, Sarah 07:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets

Please select one account and stick to it only. Thanks, Sarah 05:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]