User talk:Bweimert
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anyone have a legal request?
Contents |
[edit] In response.
Sources:
My argument is simply that Wikipedia prohibits people from using Bulletin Boards as sources. As wikipedia's policies state, these Bulletin Boards are never reliable sources. Also, a posting of Cooley as a "TTT" is only referred to in bulletin boards. Thus, "TTT" is a term derived from a bulletin board and is not an authoritative source. Remember wikipedia is about making the site and the content an encyclopedia. Personal opinions, opinions of very small groups of people are prohibited, as well as blatant attempts to engage in attacks on the content of articles are prohibited.
There have been no presentations of authoritative sources on any of the reverts. In the event you find an actual article, which agrees with your opinions posted by a verifiable & reputable source, then I welcome you to post it and I will not object, so long as the blurb you post explaining the article accurately portrays the article’s content. My concern here is for the integrity of the article, criticisms as long as they are well founded and grounded in verifiable & reputable sources are welcome.
My Accusations of Vandalism:
The accusations were made for the revert war that had been happening between us, and between you and other users on the site. I decided not to violate the wiki 3RR and instead decided to report it as vandalism. In my opinion non-familiarity with the rules of wikipedia's sources, and posting sources outside of those rules are violations of wiki's policy are vandalism -- especially since you began reverting after I posted those policies.
I assumed that the other user was a sock puppet of yours since the reversions were extremely similar to the RV war occurring. If I was mistaken I apologize, but I am still not satisfied that he is not a sock puppet.
Also, your blatant arguments for keeping a picture of feces on the page for the logo are clearly a strong showing of bias on your part. As your edits show, your only objective is to berate and destroy the authenticity and reputation of the school. This kind of conduct is not the conduct that wikipedia intended when it began. Wikipedia is a place of cooperation, and verification. As I said before, Criticism if it is reputable and verifiable is welcome. Bulletin Board posts are specifically prohibited as part of wikipedia policy. This article is not a place to debate the merits of the school; the article is intended to provide information.
This user is well aware of the opinions of Cooley in small groups of online posting boards. However, these groups do not reflect the overall opinion of the school in the community nor in the state of Michigan, nor the country. Please be aware that your attacks in my opinion are libel. The school & students, and over 10,000+ graduates of the school, and practicing attorneys tend to disprove the opinions of a few who are far removed from the school, the practice of law, and the attorneys of the State of Michigan. Again, wikipedia is not a place to debate these issues, the bulletin boards are.
Personal Attacks:
Calling someone a "Cooley troll" and the obvious lack of tact on the discussion board, I feel was a personal attack. The candor presented on the discussing board by you and those of your cohorts are transparent attempts by people bent on clouding the reputation of the school, so they can feel better about the schools they choose. While they are within their rights to do so, wikipedia is not a proper forum for this type of activity.
My Position to Evaluate Information regarding the article:
As the accused stated, I am a Cooley student, and I attend the school. Thus, I feel I am more qualified to verify the authenticity of the article more so than other users, as I am familiar with the students, the school, the faculty, and the practice of law in Michigan. I however, avoid interjecting my personal opinions of the school into the article (I have my own good things and bad things to say about the school). I did not post it is the "best school ever" or other such praises of the school on the site. I am merely attempting to keep the articles integrity for being factually correct, using authoritative, verifiable, and reputable sources. Bulletin boards are not these sources. My goal is not to hold Cooley out as the best law school around for personal gain. Your goal should not be to portray the school as the worst around for personal pleasure. In between we will find a compromise.
I welcome your invitation to resolve this issue in a civil manner. I also hope you recognize that the opinions of a few are not necessarily the correct opinions.
bweimert 19:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Response -- although I do not have time right now to respond to each of your points, I do commit myself to not editing this site until we have reached an agreeement. However, you are wrong about all of these edits being by sockpuppets of me -- numerous other edutors have been making edits similar to mine -- many became interested due to an internet message board thread a while back. Thus, please do not assume that I an responsible for any edits contrary to your wishes that may occur. Since it seems we have reached a civil solution to that, would you mind removing our discussion form the requests for investigation page? I think my words and actions in response to your comments make clear that I intend to proceed in good faith. Helpmeoutnow 05:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Response -- For the time being the complaint has been removed from the complaint board per our agreement. I will also avoid editing until such time as we reach a further agreement. Please be aware if this preliminary editing agreement is violated then I will promptly re-request an investigation and/or Wiki Arbitration for this issue. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter, and I look forward to working with you to provide a verifiable and accurate article. bweimert 19:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Response to your unfounded vandalism accusations
- I posted the following message beneath your message on the request for investigations page. Stated briefly, I consider your accusations of vandalism to be an unfounded personal attack. Here is what I added:
- I am not a vandal...calling me that is a personal attack. I am also not in any way related to user:quepasahombre (although I am sure he/she also would not appreciate being called a vandal). Also, it is unclear how stating my opinion about these reverts on the talk page is a personal attack -- if you actually look at my comments you will see that I do not attack anyone there; I merely state a justification for my edits. My participation in this debate is entirely good faith. The issue is that this law school has a widespread reputation among law students for being poor. Users have provided links to discussions on basically every major law school discussion board that reflect this perception (I know user:bweimert attempts to claim that I am responsible for all of these discussions, but in fact I have participated in none of them...for him to suggest that I am responsible for the loterlaly thousands of postings on this topic is unlikley and seems borderline absurd). I am looking for better sources, but I feel like these edits are useful because they do reflect a near-consensus among the law student community and an oft-expressed opinion (as I understand it, wikipedia can contain opinions cited to independent sources). In short, please look at the facts before blocking me or locking this page -- in my opinion, the back and forth on the Thomas M. Cooley Law School page will ultimately be constructive, particuarly if users like user:bweimert (who, by the way admits on his user page that he is a Cooley student and thus is hardly an objective source himself) can acknowledge some place for criticisms of Cooley on its article...at that point I imagine we will quickly arrive at a compromise solution. Helpmeoutnow 05:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Note: please note: I have reverted the Cooley page to your last edit as a good will compromise. Hopefully we can come to some compromise. Please join me in the spirit of cooperation rather than making accusations about my conduct on wikipedia -- I really am acting in good faith. Helpmeoutnow 19:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent Cooley Edits
As I expected, another user -- fartman2 -- reverted your Cooley edits. I want to make clear that I am not this user and that I am abiding by our agreement. Thank you. Helpmeoutnow 04:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:Superior_Dome.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Superior_Dome.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
