User talk:Just passing by

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Just passing by! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Nietzsche

I generally agree, and I don't support Petrejo's changes at all. What I do support is adding differing views in articles, when they can be attributed to some notable and (in this case) academic source, which I think is something that Petrejo can handle (I mean, really, s/he seems to be one of the few who is interested in researching negative views on Nietzsche). So, I'm all for the wait-and-see approach with this. Hopefully, s/he will dig up some good stuff. If not, well, changes can always be reverted, although hopefully s/he will take my advice and post proposed changes to the talk page first. -Smahoney 17:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I do find his claims of objectivity (and the implied non-objectivity of anyone who disagrees with him) obnoxious, but I don't think it will be a problem in the end. As far as his excessive quoting goes, I actually think that's good - it gives all the editors more to work with, and it is unfortunate that the other editors aren't also contributing. -Smahoney 14:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. The thing is that, aside from a couple revert wars (which we've all been in) and some low-level insulting behavior (which we've all done), there's nothing that he's doing that's all that bad. He's POV-pushing, sure, but in a way that, if closely supervised, I think would be good for the article. Then again, I'm not an administrator, nor am I the final arbiter, nor am I especially closely involved with that article, so if you think that trying something like formal mediation would be a good idea, you're welcome to start the process. -Smahoney 02:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)