Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:32, 11 January 2008

Biography Stub‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

WP:COI

This article has been created and edited by a single group of five to six editors who currently have an open case of suspected sock puppetry against them. Editors should review the material and remove any unsourced or POV statements in this article and/or nominate it for deletion if it does not meet the notability guidelines. Thank you. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 01:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I counted some 29 different editors (including myself) who have made additions or deletions or changes to the article... some major.... some minor. We accused have also made improvements to James Evans (actor). Why didn't that get tagged as WP:COI as well? I request the immediate removal of the tags placed on this article by Cumulus Clouds as it appears to be a counter-attack on improvements made by those individuals he claims are attacking him. Cinemapress (talk) 08:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The "open case" of Sock puppetry is being initiated by Cumulus Clouds. His use of that case as a reason to perform attacks on the contributions of those individuals is itself a WP:COI. I am myself under attack by him, so my defense of any article attacked by him is as suspect as his original attack. I ask cooler heads to come forward. L.L.King (talk) 11:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Further, within the narrow scope of their submissions, the edits to which he refers have all been factual, truthful, and supportive with proper references... all worthy of inclusion is Wiki. His calling any of the factual articles a Wiki:COI is itself a COI. Truth and fact are never a COI. And all have maintained Wiki:NPV, unlike his own contributions, no matter how he tries to make it seem otherwise.L.L.King (talk) 12:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Making it better

I did some editng on this page. Also on James Evans and Paris in Jail. I do not have the time to do more. I have chcked every refereence and every fact or statement. The only things I cannot find proof of are the items listed in the "Life" section. Shoud they be removed? How can I find proof that someone moved at a certain time or went to a certan school over 40 years ago? I did find the actors email address on his website. Would it be okay to write him for confirmation? How do I include this? Anypose (talk) 22:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

deletion objection

"...remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason. To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, it should not be replaced."

My reason is that this is the guy who was Joy Peters in the show Tom Goes to the Mayor. Funny stuff. SufferTheFools (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• I'll bet. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

This person (though I never heard of him) clearly has some notability. CC's rush to delete seems misplaced (don't get me wrong, it certainly has its place in Misplaced Pages), but his condescending tone is out of line even if this person was a sock. Furthermore, in a rush to tag an article with as many problems as possible, he has not seen fit to explain any of them. Accordingly, I am removing some of the tags. I will contend that Mr. Schmidt should not be the one to edit his own article, but even Jimbo Wales (anyone associated with Misplaced Pages debates needs to at least know a little about this guy) has been caught editing his own article and no one threw him in the stockade...or worse. Moreover, there is no reason to throw away such information. It has been significantly pared down from what looked like a badly worded press release and seems fine now.131.44.121.252 (talk) 22:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC) (a.k.a. User:BQZip01)

I also concur that socks may have been involved in this article, BUT others have been too. Have a wikibeer on me and let's just talk about this for a little bit. 131.44.121.252 (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

• Your reverts to this article may qualify as stalking. If you continue to undo my edits on other articles I will file a complaint against you at ANI. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 00:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
• And let me be clear that I had not read the talk page when I reverted your edits as vandalism. Because of the ongoing sockpuppetry by User:L.L.King, any IP edits to this page removing the prod appear to be this same user trying to circumvent his block. I will not reverse my last edit, however, because your edits appear to be retaliation for the discussion at Kyle Field. If I find that more of my edits have been reverted in other articles I will file that complaint against you immediately. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 00:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

• Stub-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles