User talk:Michael in oc

October 2018

Hello, I'm Beyond My Ken. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to American nationalism seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:08, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to American nationalism. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:08, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at American nationalism, you may be blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:08, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Note to 'Beyond My Ken'--the very presentation of this page is not a NPOV nor is it encyclopedic. What you call "disruptive editing" is simply my attempt to balance the article toward those things that are verifiable. Previous editors, potentially including yourself, have falsely placed the Harpy's Weekly illustration from November 20, 1869 as an example of something espousing "American Nationalism" rather than American Exceptionalism, a concept that by contrast is well founded. When you use the word "thus" in an encyclopedia article as you did, it stretches all credulity that you are an adherent of NPOV policy, much less a legitimate advocate for it. Michael in oc (talk) 02:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Adding balance is fine, trying to skew the article, as you did, is not. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at American nationalism. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• To 'Beyond My Ken'--If there's any arbiters out there, I think they will clearly see that I'm attempting to bring neutrality to something that is currently skewed by ideological intent rather than encyclopedic purpose. Your repeated disruption of an editor such as myself in developing this page, however, is counter to NPOV policy and undermining to the purpose of Wikipedia. I assume that you either have no understanding of the content you're reverting or you're one of the ideologues that set up the skewed content in the first place in violation of the principles you claim to espouse. Michael in oc (talk) 03:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• (1) You don't mean "arbiters", you mean "administrators". (2) Administrators have no say over article content whatsoever. (3) All disputes over article content are settled by discussion between editors on the article talk page. (4) However, administrators do adjudicate behavioral problems, and violating WP:NPOV, as you have been doing, is a behavioral problem. (5) Therefore, if you make this change again, or any other change to the article which similarly violates NPOV, you're going to find yourself the subject of a report on the Administrators' Noticeboard. I give you my word on that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Discussion on ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Michael in oc regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:06, 3 December 2018 (UTC)