User:GordonWatts

[[Category:]]In a recent dispute, I was voted down 6.0 to 2.5 (long explanation about the half a vote thing)

While I don't like losing the vote (the voting is used to mathematically determine the consensus, since no other logical means exists), nonetheless, I am mature and accept the outcome, but I got in the last word -right or wrong -on the matter (at least, it is the last word, as of this writing). Observe:

On both the page where the dispute broke out and here on the main talk page, I point out that many feel that Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source and cite these argumentative editors as part of the reason. I could be wrong, but often times editors disagreeing with me will make generalized assumption (like Geocities or AOL or blog links are not reliable) -and not look at actual policy. Not all editors just babble; some of them make good points, and I concede I am wrong on a few points (such as my erroneous suggestion that Terri's Fight did not have special status when in fact policy does make exceptions to links from the actual participants).

OK, what I really don't like about this wiki is how many people often don't adhere to actual guidelines but sort of make up excuses for their edits; People making a case should use the actual policy as it is written to make your case; opinions don't count here.

I get in the last word on Schiavo link dispute: Many people don't consider Wikipedia itself reliable -so what was that again about those links not being reliable,...--GordonWatts 09:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

---

New news: please see my talk page for a Request for ArbCom intervention.--GordonWatts 02:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

---