User talk:CheeseStakeholder

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

duly noted. --CheeseStakeholder (talk) 12:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate categories

Your recent questions re: category duplication can be answered by remembering that everyone involved here is a volunteer and there's no centralized authority.

If you feel something is redundant, you're welcome to remove the superfluous information (just make sure to use edit summaries so that we know what you're doing). DS (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Then I imagine the solution would be to change those in the more generic "investigative reporter" category to "American investigative reporter" where relevant. Eh? CheeseStakeholder (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. "Made category tag more specific" would be a reasonable edit summary, I think. DS (talk) 12:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

your COI question

Hi CheeseStakeholder, I replied to your Gerald Posner COI question on the discussion page for his article. You seem to be a new editor. I am too. Best, Eurytemora (talk) 01:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for responding. I'll reply on your talk page CheeseStakeholder (talk) 13:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CheeseStakeholder, I largely agree with your edits, particularly with your edit of that long sentence. It definitely makes it more readable (something I was struggling with) and more neutral/professional. I’d been planning to go back myself and substitute a different word for the first instance of “claimed”.

I want to be fair to Posner. E.g. that’s why I dug up a ref and included text for his “computer database” explanation, etc. That’s also why I didn’t include references such as the Gawker article by Hamilton Nolan entitled “Gerald Posner May Set World Plagiarism Record” (for one thing, the mere title is awfully prejudicial). However, Posner has a decades-long history of apparent transgressions of the cardinal rules of journalistic ethics (and potentially even lying before Congress), and when these come to light, claiming innocence and smoothly trying to talk his way out (in part by playing “unfairly accused” victim). It appears likely that he has fabricated entire interviews in certain cases (I’ve even spoken to one such individual, who told me that Posner never interviewed him at all – just wrote up a series of quotes modified from another source and labeled it an original interview). And yet Posner often ends up not being held to account, and people forget each instance over time. I’m a little hesitant to say these things on Wikipedia, even on a talk page. But I think the full context becomes important in handling a case such as this.

Where Posner has a valid point in his own defense, it should be included. That’s only fair. And the language should be professional. But I think it’s important to try to get at the truth, and not to permit dilution/obscuring/”he said-she said”. In all of the recent stuff, the evidence is solid, and Posner’s been given the benefit of the doubt a lot of times over the years.

Unrelated – just out of curiosity – what is the “etymology” of your tag?

Best,Eurytemora (talk) 21:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd respond here, using a "talkback" message template I've just discovered. Wiki is a wonderland of templates, noticeboards and bureaucracies. On the nom de plume I'm using: it's a play on the word "cheese steak," as in Philly Cheese Steak, which I happen to like. No more deeper meaning! I'm with you on the neeed to be even-handed on Posner. I read one of his books, on the Kennedy Assassination, and I thought it was good. I'd certainly be upset if I learned that there were issues with his research. Still, he has a long career and we need to keep things in proportion. The plagiarism allegations were serious, and his explanations were unconvincing, but it's not really for us to say. CheeseStakeholder (talk) 12:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Ambrose

You may be interested in the WP policy on undue weight. You also may be interested in the history of Centpacrr's edits to the article. 75.2.209.226 (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article revisions

It looks like you might have begun a rewrite of the article. I am not following the particulars right now, but if you feel things are not going fairly or if there is some stop in progress, then please let me know. Everything's cool right now, right? Blue Rasberry 14:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight

Just out of curiosity, I'm wondering what you think of the Michael A. Bellesiles article? 75.2.209.226 (talk) 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holy shit. My first reaction is that it's awful, unless he is a true Jayson Blair character. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. CheeseStakeholder (talk) 17:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know anything about the fellow. He seems to generate more wrath among historians than do Ambrose or Goodwin (see [1], for example). Still, he must have done something to have been promoted to full professor before the publication of his controversial book. 75.2.209.226 (talk) 18:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Rossant

That article is worse than Marcia Vickers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.154.79 (talk) 20:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kevan elsby

Hello Cheesestakeholder, Referring to your comments about Bob Sales, The Atlantic Monthly and the Lynchburg Newspaper.. Bob Sales is still alive I believe, so you could speak to him yourself. I have a notarised document from Bob Sales and a tape. References to Captain Etore Zappacosta forcing a British Coxswain into Omaha Beach at gunpoint were first published in The Stagg Magazine and shortly after in The Atlantic Monthly. Bob Sales was the only survivor from this B Company 116th Infantry HQ boat on D-Day. In his own words, this gunpoint incident did not happen and he was the only survivor from the boat. Bob Sales wished to put the record straight right from the first publication in The Stagg magazine and followed this path over many years. The reason Bob was interviewed by a Lynchburg newspaper journalist was because he lives in Lynchburg, which was the home town of many of B Company 116th infantry regiment. I agree with your points about being objective, but disagree with a challenge to the legally documented memories of the only B Company 116th Infantry regiment survivor from that British LCA in the second wave on D-Day. As per my previous message on this matter, I prefer to move this debate objectively away from a discussion about Stephen Ambrose. Very happy to discuss objectively. Kevan551Kevan551 (talk) 23:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]