![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I asked a question about the relationship between the two women in the comedy duo Frangela on the article talk page with the hope that someone who knew more about them could answer it for me because I have been unable to find the answer myself. Specifically, I asked if someone knew if they were lesbian lovers or not. User:Frazzle deleted my question. I asked why on this editor's talk page and they accused me of vandalism. I tried to explain and justify asking this question on Frazzle's talk page but they just replied with insults. I then asked for a third opinion on this dispute and User:Doc Tropics responded and said it was a legitimate question. Despite this, Frazzle has again deleted my question from the talk page. Because of this, I am requesting comments on this dispute from other editors. Please chime in with your opinion on this dispute. Thank you for your time.- Schnurrbart ( talk) 02:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know if its true that Schnurrbart has been seen stealing money from the local poor box?
You see how it works, Schnurrbart? Making an unsubstantiated item look legit in the form of an "innocent question" is clearly vandalism. I and others have been fighting anonymous posters on Marcy Kaptur for months along just these very lines. At least the anonymous posters have the decency to not whine about it when their clear vandalism is removed. Grow up, bub. Find something, anything, to substantiate your "question" and you'll be fine. Frazzle ( talk) 13:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
"The policies that apply to articles apply also (if not to the same extent) to talk pages, including Wikipedia's verification, neutral point of view and no original research policies. There is of course some reasonable allowance for speculation, suggestion and personal knowledge on talk pages, with a view to prompting further investigation, but it is usually a misuse of a talk page to continue to argue any point that has not met policy requirements. Pay particular attention to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons: Editors should remove any negative material about living persons that is either unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources or is a conjectural interpretation of a source."
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I asked a question about the relationship between the two women in the comedy duo Frangela on the article talk page with the hope that someone who knew more about them could answer it for me because I have been unable to find the answer myself. Specifically, I asked if someone knew if they were lesbian lovers or not. User:Frazzle deleted my question. I asked why on this editor's talk page and they accused me of vandalism. I tried to explain and justify asking this question on Frazzle's talk page but they just replied with insults. I then asked for a third opinion on this dispute and User:Doc Tropics responded and said it was a legitimate question. Despite this, Frazzle has again deleted my question from the talk page. Because of this, I am requesting comments on this dispute from other editors. Please chime in with your opinion on this dispute. Thank you for your time.- Schnurrbart ( talk) 02:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know if its true that Schnurrbart has been seen stealing money from the local poor box?
You see how it works, Schnurrbart? Making an unsubstantiated item look legit in the form of an "innocent question" is clearly vandalism. I and others have been fighting anonymous posters on Marcy Kaptur for months along just these very lines. At least the anonymous posters have the decency to not whine about it when their clear vandalism is removed. Grow up, bub. Find something, anything, to substantiate your "question" and you'll be fine. Frazzle ( talk) 13:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
"The policies that apply to articles apply also (if not to the same extent) to talk pages, including Wikipedia's verification, neutral point of view and no original research policies. There is of course some reasonable allowance for speculation, suggestion and personal knowledge on talk pages, with a view to prompting further investigation, but it is usually a misuse of a talk page to continue to argue any point that has not met policy requirements. Pay particular attention to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons: Editors should remove any negative material about living persons that is either unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources or is a conjectural interpretation of a source."