User talk:Whisperwolf

You deleted changes I made to the ACORN page and then labled it "pure vandalism", hmmm. On 10/23/2009 I attended a forum hosted by the University of Memphis, Memphis, TN for a presentation by Wade Rathke. During the question period Rathke was asked who donated the remainder of funds owed to ACORN over and above the $210,000 that had been repaid by Dale Rathke. Wade clearly stated that the funds came from his father's estate, that the matter became public shortly before the estate was settled (the father had already passed). Wade Rathke made this statement if front of over 40 people. If you would like to confirm this matter with Wade Rathke directly, I can probably put you in contact with him as he gave me his email address after the event. I really did not think of myself as a vandal, much less a pure vandal, just someone dedicated to keeping Wikipedia accurate. I am E. Zach Lee-Wright If you will respond here I will check back. Have a nice day. Different User: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.66.2.104 (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

If you look carefully you will see that I reverted a single edit by anonymous IP address 163.150.23.199 which added the single line to the ACORN article "==ACORN IS LEFT WING NUT ORGANIZATION==". Since that point I have made no edits or reversions to that article. If you want to claim responsibility for adding the header "ACORN IS LEFT WING NUT ORGANIZATION" you go right ahead and do so, but I believe that was vandalism. Checking the history of the page I note that on 23rd October 2009, the date you mention, there were two edits to the page. Neither was by me. Please sign your posts using four tildes to make it easier to determine your edits, as anonymous edits from unknown IP addresses don't help with tracking down edits. Having looked at the list of contributions of 163.150.23.199 I can see that on numerous occasions that IP has been warned for vandalism. It has even been suspended on one occasion. If you have an issue with my editing please be more specific about what it was that I undid that you had done. Whisperwolf (talk) 08:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Looking deeper into the history of the ACORN page, there are two entries under 98.66.2.104, which according to the automatic signing bot is the IP address you changed my page from, both of them have been counter-edited by the user Xenophrenic; one on November 24 and one on November 25. If you're referring to one of these edits, you're accusing the wrong editor! Whisperwolf (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me for attempting to contact you this way. I'm unfamiliar with proper Wikipedia protocol; so, I don't know how to contact you directly (or, if I should try). I trust you will be able to remove this note -- why should it be archived?

When looking up an entry on Jason BeDuhn, I discovered you seem to have recently engaged in a discussion regarding wording of a statement you thought should be "wrote" rather than "found." Apparently you acquiesced to the wording: "his analysis led him to conclude."

It strikes me that such a statement still assumes facts not in evidence. Although one wants to believe that writers analyze and then conclude, such is not always the case. Certain writers conclude and then analyze. I am NOT accusing DeDuhn of this; I am merely pointing out that the possibility exists. Why not stick to your guns: "he wrote" -- not "concluded" and certainly not "his analysis led him to conclude." Perhaps "wrote" really is the most neutral statement.

Regardless of whether he "found" "concluded" "discovered" or "set out to prove" something or other -- no question can be raised that he "wrote" such and such.

Rod.Bias at asu.edu -- probably better to reach me at Rod.Bias at cutlip.org -- spam filters may snag you at asu.

Thanks, I'll email you at the given address and we can talk. Whisperwolf (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)