User talk:MichaelQSchmidt/Archive 013

Brian Quintana

I share your concerns about the deletion of Brian Quintana. Rather than restore I am happy to submit a new page, but was hoping you could help. My concern is that the new page will be removed as a re-post no matter how different. My verdict is still out on Quintana, but he is clearly notable. This is the last version I assisted with: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Quintana&oldid=315643392 Since this version the same group of editors (Hairhorn, Cameron Scott, Ttonyb1, Tabercil, Nightscream, Jayron32, Malo, and Geniac) have removed the substance little by little, before moving for deletion. I find their actions dismissive, racists, classist and in total violation of Wikipedia's policies. For example, "Oprah Winfrey's A Better Chance recruited him at age fifteen to attend the prestigious Hotchkiss School in Lakeville, Connecticut" was changed to "an organization that helps underprivileged youths." The program provides scholarships to gifted youth not underprivileged. References to his 2009 Congressional exploratory committee, his notable supporters, and work as a VIP facilitator were also removed. The deleted version is intentionally demeaning. I was more involved in years past, but every time I sought to improve the page with sourced material, I was blocked as a sockpuppet for Quintana or flagged for edit wars. My home and work computers were also blocked. I had planned to chime in on deletion debate, but was waiting for the California Secretary of State to certify the 2010 election results next Friday, July 16, 2010. I figure it will be harder to argue with 400,000 voters (more votes than the Governor of Nevada, New Mexico and most smaller States). Most experts deemed his campaign a success:

Sacramento Bee - "But the news of the day is that Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, who didn't get any publicity, garnered nearly three times as many votes as Kaus." http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/06/kaus-gets-just.html

KQED Public Media - "The surprise runner-up: Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, who snatched almost 15% of the vote." http://blogs.kqed.org/capitalnotes/2010/06/09/last-call-for-primary-2010/

San Gabriel Valley Tribune - "Quintana's showing was surprising. Kaus got some press. Quintana came out of nowhere," said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College. "Quintana ran a good e-mail campaign," according to Republican political consultant Matt Klink, of Cerrell Associates. http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_15282486

I see no one bashing on the third place candidate Chuck DeVore: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_devore —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleverclaus (talk • contribs) 00:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

As you know,[1] I discussed the close with the closing admin. Ask him to userfy it for you to a workspace at User:Cleverclaus/workspace/Brian Quintanna. Work on it, remove POV. Source it all to heck. Find assertions of notability and source then all to heck... find more interviews and more coverage and add then as well... and then ask User:MuZemike if your efforts might merit being moved to WP:Incubate for input from other editors. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:21, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Hairhorn who you exchanged words with on Deletion Nomination continues to diminish Quintana on United States Senate election in California, 2010 and Jon Peters page. How is he allowed to abuse Wikipedia to trash someone he clearly dislikes. You have admitted you would not vote for Quintana yet you are fair and comply with Wikipedia guidelines. Hairhorn is from Jersey and suddenly Jerzeykydd began warring with me over Quintana's inclusion on United States Senate election in California, 2010. Like him or not, he did qualify for the State ballot and mount a half descent campaign. Do you believe an editor should be blocked from a subject's page after so many edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleverclaus (talk • contribs) 03:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

All depends on the edits and perception of the edits. If an editor makes an addition that is well-cited, then it will likely stay. If an editor removes something that is well-cited, then it might return. Best to follow my advice and work on it in a userspace. And keep in mind... that of all the elections held in the US over the last 200+ years... and the multiplicity of persons who might run for one political position... there are far more losers than winners... and it's the winners who usually get the articles. And too, and please understand, what is of a concern is any article that might in any way be seen as promoting a candidate during an election run. Neutral POV is one of the core policies here. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I am surprised to hear that I'm from New Jersey. Do I even have any edits on topics concerning New Jersey? I'm not even from the US. The bitterness from this user about Brian Quinana is difficult to understand, unless of course this is the latest in a very long series of sockpuppets centred around this entry. Hairhorn (talk) 12:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles on politicians do seem to gain attention. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I am not bitter and have never contributed to Quintana's personal page or the debate to delete it. However, I resent when I see this site used for personal attacks. You clearly don't like him and that is OK, but if he is repeatedly sourced as a producer or businessman then you can't keep changing his title to assistant or event planner. Schmidt has repeatedly stated that he would never vote for the guy, but has defended the guidelines nonetheless.--Cleverclaus (talk) 10:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

?? You say quite clearly above that you were involved in editing Brian Quintana and also that you were blocked. Simply creating a new account is considered block evasion. Hairhorn (talk) 11:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)