User talk:Cptrockwood

Welcome!

Hello, Cptrockwood, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Gainesville, Florida does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Horologium (talk) 02:57, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 17:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cptrockwood. You may not use an account and a logged-out IP address to tag-team disrupt Wikipedia. Courcelles 17:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Cptrockwood (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am being cited for placing a POV on a page that is then removed against your guidelines. I replace the POV and then I AM CITED FOR PUSHING A POV. ARE YOU KIDDING? Enforce your guidelines. I am being bullied by city boosters that will not allow anything negative about their city being posted. The are censoring the history of their city and now are making a mockery of you for by citing someone who is trying to enforce Wiki policy. You have been taken. I have a PhD in American history from the University of Florida and you have been high jacked by city booster hucksters.

Decline reason:

Edit warring is not allowed, even if you are sure you are right, even if you are right, because if it is allowed articles end in the state preferred by the most obstinate edit-warrior. Read WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle: you should discuss changes on the article talk page to try to reach WP:Consensus; if you cannot, use WP:Dispute resolution. JohnCD (talk) 11:54, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Cptrockwood (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The objectivity of this page is clearly in question. Any discussion of Koran burning, crime rates, and racial conflict are removed from both page and discussion. POV warnings are taken down against Wiki policy. This page deserves a POV warning. I have a PhD in American history from the University of Florida. Yes, please keep an eye on this page. It is a booster page, nothing more. I am still blocked for insisting on this POV. I am willing to engage in discussion, the boosters will not. SHAME!!!!

Decline reason:

An unblock request is not the place to continue your argument. You must address the reason for your block calmly and explain how you will avoid situations like this in the future. TN X Man 17:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

If am the one engaged in vandalism, why am I the one willing to identify myself. All I want is for the POV warning remain on the page. Do you deny it has been questioned? Do you deny removing POV warnings without discussion is problematic. There is a problem and it is you. Lawrence P. Rockwood, PhD

Actually, Cptrockwood - you don't appear to be blocked. Your block log says that it was a 24 h block back on April 4. You may be caught in an autoblock or an IP block. Could you cut and paste the message you get when you try to edit a page here? Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-tendency[edit]

I agree with your edits regarding this article. Your sources are impeccable in my opinion, it looks like some editors are pulling the RUG out from under you.--Plato 09:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of note I noted something about the editors of the Multi-tendency article.--Plato 11:45, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:30, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Gainesville, Florida, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:45, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011 (2)[edit]

I restored your

on the Gainesville, Florida page; this article is dreadfully written (one of the worst I've ever encountered); even the Enver Hoxha article is better in my view.--Plato 09:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011[edit]

I restored the POV warning a second time. This article would be far superior if you had written it in entirety after spending a fortnight in Milano's, than what these boosters have made Gainsville, Florida out to be.--Plato 09:41, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even the Stalin article is written in a better prose.--Plato 04:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]