I think the external links critical of Lou Dobbs which you repeatedly
removed are quite appropriate. They are a bit dated, but are sharp
criticisms of Lou Dobbs from substantial sources. You were relying
too much on detailed parsing of a Wikipedia guideline and edit
warring over it. I love Lou Dobbs and agree with him about illegal
immigration and many other things, but he is very much an
outrageously point of view reporter; our article needs a few links
which sharply criticize him.
Fred
On Apr 22, 2006, at 12:32 PM, cwarner wrote:
I've been blocked by an Administrator who is
clearly abusing his
administrative rules in regards to 3RR. He's reverted a change I've
made
in regards to the Lou Dobbs article located here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Dobbs please also see the following
discussion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lou_Dobbs#Removed_Dobbswatch.com_.
26_Opinion_Journal.
He claims there is concensus; there is none. The article section in
question has been tagged with the NPOV Dispute tag and submitted for a
request for arbitration here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFAR
I've followed the guidelines of Wikipedia and have been banned
subsequently for doing so. Through out this process I have been
threatened numerous times for following the guidelines set forth by
Wikipedia policy.
This hasn't gone without notice as others have said the same thing
(see
discussion) as well as having my reverts, reverted by parties who took
the time to read the discussion (see diffs).
I'm posting here as i've been blocked and protocol has allowed me this
option. I will exhaust every avenue within Wikipedia guidelines until
they are no more to exhaust.
Administrators should not abuse their power and that is exactly
what is
taking place here. This is my public notice of such activity.
Thank you,
Christopher Warner
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l