Talk:Peter Braid
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Mindmatrix in topic Why was my edit deleted?
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
Is using the word "battle" really appropriate here? it seems very childish and unprofessional. Kamster99 (talk) 06:38, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Especially considering that there were other political opponents (other than Telegdi) in 2011 that differed from 2008. Kamster99 (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Why was my edit deleted? edit
Yesterday morning (June 10) I edited Peter Braid's biography to include his interview re: Afghan Detainee abuse, with Tom Clarke on Power Play. I provided all relevant sources. Yet at 3:54 PM all of my editing was removed, no doubt by someone in Mr. Braid's office. Why was this allowed? I have further editing to do but what will be the point and why is this allowed. No explanation was provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmilyDee (talk • contribs) 14:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Your edits were inappropriate, failed WP:NPOV in numerous places and WP:COPYVIO in many others (we do not write about House of Commons motions, for instance, by including the entire verbatim text of the entire Hansard discussion — we do it by this cool new thing you might have heard of called "summarizing"), and were sourced to YouTube videos in many cases (never an acceptable source under any circumstances). And the removal was explained; that's what the edit summaries are for.
- Contributions to Wikipedia are welcome. But they need to be written and formatted according to our content rules, not your own. Your edits, in fact, were intentionally designed to maximize how bad he looks and were not neutral in character; Wikipedia is not a venue for grinding axes with politicians you dislike, but a venue for neutral information about our topics. Bearcat (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- The edit was reverted by User:Bearcat (see most recent revert) because the material you added did not adhere to Wikipedia policies, specifically WP:BLP and WP:NPOV, and it also appeared to be copied from elsewhere. Wikipedia articles should be written using a neutral tone and should avoid synthesis. (An example of the latter is using a set of sources to support a point of view none of them express.) And please do not accuse someone of bias ("no doubt by someone in Mr. Braid's office"); you're less likely to have your points taken seriously if you don't assume good faith. Mindmatrix 16:36, 10 June 2014 (UTC)