"

 Randroide Answers to ""Next Step"" 

Guys, I do not see you taking steps to Wikipedia:Requests for mediation.

I can not do this job because I always connect from ""filtered"" institutional net-access, and following those steps could result in new, undesired, controversial ""truncation"" of words by the software. I do not want that happenning.

Could you please follow the instructions in the link I provided?. Thank you. 

 Randroide answers to New reference by Burgas00 

  At last we agree on something!...of course that the new section is a good idea: The false ""suicidal"" terrorists from PRISA will also be included there. 

Come oooooon, boys, start writing that section. I do not want all the kudos for myself: The new proposed article is, by now, an effort made only by me. 

But remember: NPOV and sources, all the sources. Just like me citing ""El País"" in the section about the doubts about the genuineness of the 13th bomb. Cheers  

 

Indeed, a good point. And all the remarks in COPE too. And the ""moral certitudes"" of Mariano Rajoy published in El Mundo.

  I agree with you 100%, Larean.

  What Randroide omits to mention on the section about the 13th bomb is that he only added balancing references when I insisted that he do so, the original version he created was entirely POV, as is much of the rest of the proposed article. Also, all the sources that he added from El Pais are only available to subscribers - NPOV it is not. 

  You are right, Southofwatford, in your ""Randroide omits..."" section.

If you have not subscription to ""El País"", I am sorry but that´s your problem. My ""institutional"" access also has some advantages, like paid access to ""El País"" (and many, many other publications and books). That´s one of the reasons for my exclusive use of ""filtered"" Internet accesss: It´s much easier for me to work here due to the easy availability of sources.

Do you see?. The truncation of words is offsett (I think) by better sources.

BTW, if you write under a ""Randroide answers"" section you are:
Invading ""my"" space. I do not mind, really. But you are doing it.
Risking new truncations on your messages. To avoid this, please write OUTSIDE ""Randroide answers"" sections.

If you think that the proposed article is POV, work in it to make it NPOV. The article is not ""mine"".

  I'll take the risk of you truncating the reply and put it here, it's very short. The issue is not whether I subscribe to El País, its whether the people who read an article in the English Wikipedia subscribe to it. All sources used should be accessible to all readers of the article, putting in a source that readers will not be able to see just so you can claim the article is NPOV is, to my mind, completely unreasonable.

  

All sources used should be accessible to all readers of the article

Very funny, Southofwatford. 

I am going to follow this joke of yours.

Please propose also the deletion of all books as sources, because, did you know?, there is always someone without this or that book.
Delete all references to TV or radio stations, because that user in Brazil has no TV and no radio at home.
Delete all the references in spanish, because, did you know?, there are users who know no spanish.

It´s a pleasure to read this kind of funny jokes, really. I had a good laugh.

User:Southofwatford  How strange that you should find it so funny, after all most of the sources we are providing should enable users to find out more information about what is being sourced, so to deliberately choose sources that require those users to pay to see the information is not funny, it's simply bizarre. Equally, in the English Wikipedia I would argue that choosing a Spanish or other foreign language source when an equally valid source exists in English does not make sense, except perhaps to those who are too busy laughing - your cynicism is evident in your response.

 08:3