User talk:JOEFIXIT

As no one seems to have extended you an official Wikipedia welcome yet:

Welcome!

Hello, JOEFIXIT, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:25, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

US Casualties[edit]

Could you add your source for those casualty changes to the external link section of the article. Ideally we should do a better job of sourcing each number in that article. Rmhermen 16:49, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Warning[edit]

Hello JOEFIXIT, you probably remember me from our minor tuff on Philippine-American War about the unsourced sentence, and my compliments to you about all of the work you put into the Philippine-American War. In retrospect, I think our small argument was actually beneficial, because it has prepared you for a foe who does not share our same POV (the US invaded the Philippine-American War and killed hundreds of thousands of people), and therefore he will be more of a problem than I ever was.

Like a much easier foe in December [[1]], I think because of my agressive editing style but I may have also led this wikipedian you are now disputing to Philippine-American War. I apologize if I led him to Philippine-American War, this user had lost the battle at another page, Business Plot, so he may have decided to take the war to this page.

This user and I have had a long fight on several boards, including (from newest to oldest):

He is POV warrior, but he is a smart POV warrior, the smartest and must cunning POV warrior I have met thus far on Wikipedia.

What you can expect

Please see my warning to Jmabel: Warning.

Which is to say, he is warning me about Rjensen, not warning me about my own conduct! - Jmabel | Talk 03:15, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, sorry I didn't clarify this. I didn't want to name names.Travb 08:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For more details on this users behavior, see Talk:Business_Plot, it is a long argument, and for your conveinence there is summary I wrote to a third party I invited to intervene here: Talk:Business_Plot#Thank_you_Fagstein_for_your_input.

I just recently asked the same third party to intervene at United States presidential election, 1900, because of this users similar behavior on Business Plot. (deleting large portions of text which does not fit his POV). Fortunatly this user has not deleted large portions of text on Philippine-American War yet.

My suggestions

My suggestions from my experience:

Remain civil with this user (I toned down your words to this user--if arbitration is needed in the future, if you remain civil, it will make your case stronger, unfortunatly, I have often been uncivil to this user--which is my own weakness)
Exhastively source everything that you write
Check his sources: I have caught him at least once using contradictory sources to what he claims. (Many of the books he quotes are on Amazon or Google Print)
Beware of his new contributions over the whole article, when he adds material, he usually deletes large portions of footnoted text that he does not agree with.
If this falls, and as a last resort call a Wikipedia:Third opinion into the argument. I cannot emphasize this enough: calling Wikipedia:Third opinion should be a last resort.

Anyway, I don't have the time right now to devote all my time on Philippine-American War, I need to write a 25 page, 6000 word law article on Colombia, ASAP.

I have stopped his asaults at United States presidential election, 1900 and Business Plot for now. The nice thing about this user, is he is so cunning, that he really makes you defend your own POV, and you learn a lot more about the subject. I have his attacks to thank for me becoming an ameteur expert on the Business Plot.

Your recent argument about his contribution, "On January 1, 1899, Emilio Aguinaldo was declared the first President after he killed his opponent" reminds me of his assetions on Business Plot that the meeting between the business leaders and the trial were over a year before. With a little research, I found out this was wrong. As I said to Jmabel: From my expereince at Business Plot he has this thin layer of authority, which is very convincing, but when you dig a little deeper you realize that he is a POV warrior, who will manipulate and even invent sources to support his own POV.

I have found that the The only way you are going to win with him, is to outsource him. You have to prove every bit of what you say. That is why our minor argument, i think, was such good practice for you: now you are up against the most cunning POV warrior I have ever met on wikipedia.

Signed Travb 18:29, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JOEFIXIT[edit]

I will find sources with page numbers for those claims.[2] I know we have very different ideas about citing sources. I trust that Agoncillo actually said those things, and you simply didn't just pick the first person on the list to cite.Travb 13:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moro Rebellion Causalities[edit]

Thanks for adding causality figures for the Moro Rebellion! I was thinking about adding an infobox, and was a bit worried about putting up a bunch of questionmarks. What is your source for those figures, and what years do those figures include? Also, do you have figures for what American troop deployments were like? (I have figures for the Moros.) crazyeddie 20:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]