zeamays造句

• We are happy to attempt to find alternative or additional references for content stated, but in order to satisfy Zeamays objections, we need to know what they specifcally are, versus his complete blanketing of the entire article as invalid.
• Zeamays should provide specificity of each instance he believes there is use of a partisan political website, at a minimum, so one can determine if such use is valid or not . talk ) 18 : 12, 14 September 2011 ( UTC)
• VaBio1 counters ( Talk : Jeff Frederick ), " Zeamays has yet to provide any evidence or even argument as to why information is unreliable . " I counter it is self-evident that any statement supported only from a biased source is not worthy of Wikipedia.
• :: We have no objection to addressing what Zeamays claims as " the heart of the dispute ", but it is impossible to do because Zeamays has persistenly refused to be more specific about what content he views as lacking a factual basis based on the reference provided.
• :: We have no objection to addressing what Zeamays claims as " the heart of the dispute ", but it is impossible to do because Zeamays has persistenly refused to be more specific about what content he views as lacking a factual basis based on the reference provided.
• Once again, Zeamays refuses to provide specifics regarding his objections and simply wants his version of edits to stand with no or blanket justification, and we'd argue he is maliced and partisan due to his refusal to be specific and engage in a dialogue to resolve differences.
• Based on the page history of Jeff Frederick and the discussions at User _ talk : Vabio1 and Wikipedia : Biographies _ of _ living _ persons / Noticeboard # Jeff _ Frederick, it would appear that there are several more editors involved in this dispute other than Vabio1 and Zeamays.
• :: Vabio1 asks, " Zeamays should provide specificity of each instance he believes there is use of a partisan political website . " The answer is simple, just do a search for the instances of citations to Votejeff . com where facts ( other than Jeff Frederick's own views, which I would allow ) are to be supported.
• :Authoritative citations have been found and referenced, but Zeamays refuses to review them and provide specifics about his objections, instead simply reverting back to his orignal edits with no regard for what changes have been made to address his stated concerns ( which are vague at best ), and no regard for actual updates of content . talk ) 16 : 18, 14 September 2011 ( UTC)