User talk:Lemonhead

Dear Latebird,

I saw your crusade to protect your relative Miyeegombo Enkhbold. According to wikipedia policy it is prohibited to write about your relative. Lemonhead 14:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Miyeegombo Enkhbold Hi, glad I found someone who is interested in political figures. I need a second (or third) opinion on the current prime minister of Mongolia. Care to comment there? --Latebird 22:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. But I suspect User:Lemonhead needs some direct admin intervention before he stops his crusade. --Latebird Sorry I have to bother again. Unfortunately the issue has turned into the beginning of an edit war (sources vs. opinion) and I am subjected to personal attacks both in edit summaries and talk. My warnings and arguments have fallen on deaf ears. Now I need at least one other person trying to talk reasonably with User:Lemonhead, as a basis for more formal steps against him. Thanks for any help you can give! --Latebird 12:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --Latebird 17:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Be careful: An important message - PLEASE READ
Please be extremely careful when adding in information that it does not involve defamation (if you don't know what defamation is, read this). Comments that defame an individual may leave you open to being sued by them. Your status here, whether as a signed on user or as an anonymous IP, would not protect you. Someone you defame could get a court order instructing your server to supply your details to them. They could then sue you for damages. Remember, while Section 230 of the United States Communications Decency Act protects Wikipedia from being sued for defamation, it may not protect the person who posted any defamation on a Wikipedia page.

Furthermore the Board of Wikipedia has ruled that Where the user has been vandalising articles or persistently behaving in a disruptive way, [personal information] data may be released to assist in the targeting of IP blocks, or to assist in the formulation of a complaint to relevant Internet Service Providers. (Full information on Wikipedia privacy policy here)

This box has been placed on your talk page because another Wikipedian suspects that, perhaps innocently, you may have defamed someone in your contributions. Please recheck your edits. Do not make allegations against someone unless you have verifiable, independently-sourced evidence. Don't rely on hear-say, rumours, or things you believe without proof to be facts. Wikipedia requires sources for all claims.

If you have defamed someone, you may be blocked without warning from editing Wikipedia. If you find that you have inadvertently defamed someone in an article, do two things:
1. Remove the defamation from the article immediately.
2. Hit this link and leave a note on that page saying that you accidentially left defamatory claims in named article. (Don't repeat the claims. They will be able to see from your edit removing them what they were.) A developer will then delete the claim from the page history

Once that is done, and the defamation is gone completely from our records, the problem should be solved.

--Latebird 17:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I highly doubt that Latebird is a relative of Miyegombo Enkhbold. There are many disputes on Wikipedia where people remove negative information about people, and we rarely assume something like that, unless there is proof, which has not been shown in this case. There is still plenty of negative information about Enkhbold in his article, Latebird and I are simply making sure that the view on him is balanced. We were making progress in resolving the dispute, so please stop the personal attacks and we can continue working on the article. Academic Challenger 00:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Academic Challenger, I also try to edit article for facts. Why do you think I am making personal attacks? The first person who is claiming and talking badly about Lemonhead is Latebird. If Academic Challenger, you think you are a good editor, why are you siding with Latebird talking we? You are POV yourself. So you can't be good editor. Why Latebird is covering up negative facts of Miyeegombo Enkhbold in favor of Miyeegombo Enkhbold and try to defame Democratic Party people including Mendsaikhan Enkhsaikhan by reportedly editing the text to look him bad/ Lemonhead 14:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Though Latebird has criticized your edits, your attacks on him are much worse than his on you. He has never claimed that you are a relative or employee of Elbegdorj. You have made good edits to the article but after carefully looking at many versions of the article it still seems to me that Latebird has made the article more neutral while continuing to keep many negative facts about Enkhbold in the article. By the way, when you respond on my talk page please put comments on the bottom of the section, not the top. Thanks. Academic Challenger 23:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Academic Challenger,

I researched on your edits and found out that you like positions of people in politics. There is smaller commonality between you and user Latebird that you both like positions. I observed from your edits that you both focus mostly on positions, titles of people such as deputy president, prime minister, chairman of department so on. I focus on the outcomes of people's work and deed to society to other people rather than their position. I guess our difference begins from here. Therefore, we are arguing a lot.

Academic Challenger, you first created article in wikipedia on Tsakhiagiyn Elbegdorj after he became prime minister and there are hundreds of edits by people since that time. But your own created article about Elbegdorj, he "made revolution by standing on chair" doesn't sound realistic. I don't think revolution is so tiny or easy as simply done by talking from standing on chair. You didn't cite that and your POV begins from there. But it looks like that text long been changed since. If you see revolution history, you will see what I mean.

About your suggestion that I am a relative or employee of Elbegdorj, Hallalouya!! I wish I were but unfortunately not. I want to become an apprentice of Elbegdorj if it is possiible and to learn from him doing lots of great works to society in the shortest period of time especially his speed. If he or his office ever reads this, or anyone who knows how to approach him please advise me for how to apply. I consider Tsakhiagiyn Elbegdorj is a living legend and since nobody today has a chance to be a student from other legends such as Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon Bonaparte.

For Miyeegombo Enkhbold's case, his work has lots of controversies towards society from land related corruption to illegally overthrowing Elbegdorj's government and took the prime minister's position. However, Academic Challenger and Latebird it looks like you both love the position of him rather than what he did to people as forcing poor families to leave their land with arrogance using his position only. Therefore, whoever, keeps deleting the facts no matter whether it is negative or positive, that person should have a reason.

That is what I meant. Lemonhead 16:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I realize that I need to work on writing more about the outcomes of what people did rather than just their positions and I am trying to work on that. I know that Elbegdorj did not make the revolution by standing on a chair. I only read about it in a news article that came out when he became prime minister, and I thought it was interesting so I put it in. I am glad that many people have expanded it. That is after all, the point of Wikipedia. However, if I was writing that article today, now that I am older and more experienced I would have written it better. I know that Enkhbold is very controversial and the more I read about him the more I don't like him. Much of our argument is about the formatting of the article and how much comments should be put into the article about his actions as opposed to just facts. I have no problem with the fact that he made poor families leave their land being in the article, and I don't think Laebird does either since he hasn't removed things like that in a long time. However, saying that Enkhbold is a horrible corrupt person for doing that is not necessary. Readers should judge that for themselves. Most politicians have done controversial things which is just as bad or worse and they do not have that tone in their articles. Academic Challenger 21:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]