Talk:Ellen Simonetti/Archive 2

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an encyclopedia

As per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, unencyclopedic content is being removed from the article. Further additions of unencyclopedic content will also be removed. 10:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Two statements in 13:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC) edit summary:

Chulcoop's statement in 18:04, 17 March 2007 (UTC) edit summary:

  • "oh yes it is"   (emphasis added)

Another editor's statement in 18:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC) edit summary:

  • "Come on, please, Chulcoop, don't start it again"

Chulcoop (talk · contribs) contributions suggest that the account was registered for the purpose of adding unencyclopedic content to the encyclopedia and editing disruptively to obstruct those NPOV editors who remove it. — Athænara ✉ 01:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

→ Quote from the top of the Wikipedia:Disruptive editing guideline:

"This page in a nutshell: Obvious cranks and disruptive editors may be blocked indefinitely by admins, or banned by ArbCom or by a consensus of Wikipedians." — Æ. ✉ 09:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Posts by Single purpose accounts

Chulcoop

I have added the Lisa Robertson reference as Ellen's pics show her "misbehaving" on a plane and Lisa Robertson was fired for misbehaving on a plane. Chulcoop 17:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Note from chulcoop

I am NOT 24.44.253.47.

All i did recently was add info about Lisa Robertson which i think IS relevant as she was a flight attendant fired for inappropriate behaviour on board an airplane. Chulcoop 18:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC) — Chulcoop (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Chris mais = 24.44.253.47

I want to go on record saying that I nominate this page for deletion on the premise that it is inciting a great deal content revisions that are not encyclopaedic in nature. If anything it shows the contentions of the editors/contributors on the page of what suffices as genuine fact and reported fiction Secondly, the revisions and edit to this page have been constant. There has been edit warring with myself as well as others on this page that have resulted in material being added and erased on a daily basis. ChrisMais 21:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC) — 24.44.253.47 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

On the face of it your complaints make no sense; can you be more specific as to what you think is not encyclopedic? As to edit warring, yes there have been persistent disruptive editing to this page, but I think the page now represents a consensus agreement among the responsible editors. You seem to suggest that the page has fiction on it, but what? The statements are supported by references to responsible news outlets (BBC, CNN, etc.) That the revisions have been constant...so what? It is the wikipedia where revisions are constant. I've already spent a great deal of time trying to convince disruptive editors that the article has to be NPOV (that means "Neutral Point Of View", not "Negative Point Of View" btw) and treated with special care because it is a biography of a living person (see archived discussion). I won't spend that time that again; it seems to have been a wasted effort. Bdushaw 19:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Chris mais (talk · contribs) = 24.44.253.47 (talk · contribs), one of our disruptive editors. Presently blocked. Bdushaw 19:56, 28 March 207 (UTC)
Please check again. There have been quite a number of page changes recently. Where do you see consensus ? And an unknown editor, Chulcoop and several IP addresses including my own have contributed to disruptive editing which by itself warrants my request. Check the history and you will find it to be true. There is no prevailing reason for this much change for a singular article. And when you go back and compare the changes some of them cite pornographic content and other unsupoorted tabloid content toward the subject of the article. That alone shows the opposite of consensus and shows that perhaps the editing has relented but still there seems to be varying areas of dispute here. For example, several of my initial cited contributions of articles( blogs, posted intenet sources) were summarily erased without any provided reasoning before I got into an edit war. Another editior cited the blog site of Ms. Simonettti to have been carrying pornograpic material resulting in her dismissal with cited content that again vanished. The statement that is an active member of the Committee to Protect Bloggers is also untrue she was formerly a member but no longer she gave her status in that organization. What relevance is it in the article that she believes in airplane safety as previously mentioned when it comes to her viewpoints on her dismissal and the aftermath of said incident ? Checking further into the rules that govern the biography of living persons it says and I quote the article should not be unduly self-serving" and yet in the article we have her Montel appearance, her book signing and susequnent release of her book and touring. The article would seem to read that Delta was in the wrong to fire her when it has been yet to reach a decision in the court system. ChrisMais (Six edits between 21:05 & 21:39) 28 March 2007 (UTC) — 24.44.253.47 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Correction check again Bdushaw as of this day, unblocked. Otherwise I couldn't be making these comments now could I ? ChrisMais (Six edits between 21:05 & 21:39) 28 March 2007 (UTC) — 24.44.253.47 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
↑ User posted above after expiration of 1 week block.

WP:V and WP:DE by SPAs

Wikipedia:Vandalism
Wikipedia:Disruptive editing
Wikipedia:Single purpose accounts
Unregistered
Registered

February, March, April 2007 vandalism and disruptive editing to Ellen Simonetti article: page history research results. — Athænara ✉ 06:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Ellen_Simonetti/Archive_2"