No offense, but nominating articles for deletion is not something brand new users do. Could you take a moment and explain your history on the wikipedia -- so we know we can trust you are not a sockpuppet?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 03:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I do take offense and you should apologize. I am a member of Students for a Democratic Society and familiar with both the organization's history and the reference material cited. These are all the requirements needed. You should be ashamed of yourself for resorting to these kind of tactics in an edit disagreement. SamuraiDiscoCat (talk) 15:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I believe it's a legitimate concern, considering that your first edit was to nominate an article for deletion. That indicates that you have been around for a while, as you are already familiar with some of Wikipedia's processes. Either you've been around for a bit as an IP user and been very observant, or you're someone's sock. I personally lean towards your being a legitimate user that had been an IP for some time because of the fact that when you nominated the article for deletion, you made a lot of rookie mistakes. However, it's still good to clear the air. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Reply
I think that's a more fair way of talking about it. The way you brought up my identity in the edit discussion seemed like it really just lacked good faith from the get-go, but I think this is a bit more reasonable so I apologize for my hostile reaction. I just felt really attacked for doing something that I thought should be legitimately done.

As you have been involved in editing this article you may wish to participate in this discussion. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)Reply