Talk:Edward Snowden: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Article Images

Content deleted Content added

Revision as of 17:12, 30 March 2014 edit

Petrarchan47

(talk | contribs)

Extended confirmed users

14,766 edits

← Previous edit

Revision as of 17:17, 30 March 2014 edit undo

JohnValeron

(talk | contribs)

4,272 edits

Next edit →

Line 691:

Maybe a request for comment on user is needed. But for now, please stop confounding this serious situation at an article you've dropped into during the height of talk-page controversy. Your edits and arguments are tendentious and you've admitted to the reason. If you feel the article as a whole is just too friendly towards Snowden, be responsible and create a new section to voice your concerns. I will note that [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DrFleischman#a_case_study_in_RS Dr F is now in agreement with me] and refuses to support Bdell555 in this passport edit war, though I am not expecting an apology. He disappeared... but here you are as if only the name has changed. And Bdell555 is suddenly is nowhere to be seen, meaning he will be back once the noise dies down, leaving me to deal with him by myself, again. '''[[User:Petrarchan47|petrarchan47]][[User talk:Petrarchan47|t]][[Special:Contributions/Petrarchan47|c]]''' 16:56, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

:At the very least John, use the talk page rather edit warring over passport information in the lede. Can we agree to this? I thought this was a given. '''[[User:Petrarchan47|petrarchan47]][[User talk:Petrarchan47|t]][[Special:Contributions/Petrarchan47|c]]''' 17:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

::Notwithstanding your paranoid fantasies, my only "bias" here is in striving for fairness. In becoming interested in Edward Snowden, I was disappointed to find a Wikipedia article that leans over backward at every step to depict him in the most favorable light, while autocratically rejecting any attempts to balance this controversial subject. I will continue to make edits as I see fit, and you will no doubt continue to revert my edits. So be it. Perhaps eventually we will reach a stalemate. If, at that point, this article is more balanced, I will be satisfied. [[User:JohnValeron|JohnValeron]] ([[User talk:JohnValeron|talk]]) 17:17, 30 March 2014 (UTC)