I don't see this set of pages making any positive contribution to the SourceWatch. Any discussion from sysops or admins on why to not stop it now?
--Maynard 18:14, 4 Dec 2004 (EST)
If this Wiki does not allow civil minority opinions on our personal sections, then please Block me now! So that I may be martyred. Ken Weide 17:34, 04 Dec 2004 (CST)
This Wiki (SourceWatch) has what you refer to as "personal sections", which are NOT for the purpose of developing a personal set of wiki pages without relevance to or integration with the SourceWatch as a whole.
--Maynard 18:55, 4 Dec 2004 (EST)
Your Point of View is not an issue at all. The SourceWatch is not your personal note space, web space, blog space, or promotional platform. If you can understand that and abide by the collaborative principles and stated themes of the SourceWatch, you're contributions will be most welcomed. If not, they will be deleted as inappropriate, which is an action which I have not taken yet, but have requested the input of other sysops and administrators of SourceWatch. It should arrive within a day or so. If not, then I'll have to act on my own judgement, which I'm willing and capable of doing.
--Maynard 21:33, 4 Dec 2004 (EST)
Maynard - I agree with your sketch of the difference between personal pages that are used as a space for organising thoughts and notes before posting to article pages as distinct from using a personal page totally unrelated to SourceWatch. Like you I was tolerating the additions in the hope that the connection with SourceWatch purposes would become obvious - but so far I see none.I'm for deleting. --Bob Burton 21:45, 4 Dec 2004 (EST)
Maynard and Bob, I vote for deletion too. Weide, if you want to research topics that are in tune with your point of view, how about some articles about Democrat lobby firms and lobbyists? These are under-researched on SourceWatch, and sensible articles about them will not be deleted. But if you just want to put up some personal pages, may i suggest http://www.blogspot.com --Neoconned 22:00, 4 Dec 2004 (EST)
Asked for my opinion
Hello Weide, as you specifically asked for my opinion, I checked the pages you made so far. Although the scope of SourceWatch seems to be widening, I can clearly understand why the admins like Maynard and Bob Burton have a problem to see where this would fit into SourceWatch. This project started about collaboratively writing a free encyclopedia of propaganda. Some people give donations in order to keep this project running. If you have contributions to the already widened theme of SourceWatch then of course they are welcome. I cannot remember we have ever blocked somebody with a user account. However, if the relation with other SourceWatch articles remains as vague as they are now, then I think Maynard has a point. Your remarks about "being martyred" and "allow civil minority opinions" doesn't seem fair to me and doesn't help your case. OTOH, if it is decided to block you and delete your pages, then I would like to ask the admins to maybe block the pages you have made so far but to not delete them until you have had enough time (at least a week or so from now) to copy the contents to some other place. Bonzai 01:23, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)
I have listed two of the Daschle Family lobbyists: Lobbying_firms
Is that of use? I assure you that much of this information is all inter-related in some form. Is it a lack of resources issue, then? Do you need a new server, GOP Cyber volunteers, links to your resources from my media pages, Search Engine Optimizatino tips? Weide 16:48, 7 Dec 2004 (EST)
Hi Weide -- yes thanks for starting the Daschle article - that is exactly the sort of material we have as our main priority - lobbyists, think tanks, PR companies and their campaigns. If you have any other editorial queries feel free to drop me a line (email in the D footer). As for the technical side of SourceWatch - Sheldon oversees that. Cheers bob