Talk:Elizabeth Swaney

Negative Bias Towards Elizabeth Swaney

User Kelapstick appears to be using negative bias towards Elizabeth Swaney, and only citing the most salacious, negative articles. Kittenpow is using neutral sources and neutral language. Request to keep neutral language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittenpow (talk • contribs) 13:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Another User with Negative Bias

Here's the official FIS qualifying document: https://data.fis-ski.com/media/olympic-games/2018/english-qs/owg-pyeongchang-2018-qualification-system-freestyle-skiing.pdf which is much more detailed, and includes much more criteria, than the articles mention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittenpow (talk • contribs) 23:34, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

The articles in use have negative language and not neutral language, I agree with much of what Ser Amantio di Nicolao said in the most recent comment. The articles often use biased language (e.g. "scammed") without reason why. Kelapstick is choosing to use the articles with the most heated headlines, and most critical, "Op-ed"articles to use as sources. Speculation is also often used as filler language in this Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittenpow (talk • contribs) 23:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Ser Amantio di Nicolao also appears to be using negative bias with the entry for Elizabeth Swaney, user seems to have copied what a previous user wrote as well, which also had negative bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittenpow (talk • contribs) 18:57, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. Everything in this article is supported by reliable sources. Ms. Swaney made news because of her lackluster performance, and how she managed to make it to the Olympics. It's not bias, it's fact. If you continue on this path of continually removing sourced information Kittenpow, you will be blocked form editing. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 16:44, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

I have to admit, the tone of the article bothers me a bit...even if it is supported by the sources (the tone of which also bothers me more than a bit.) Having said which...wholesale removal of content is NOT the way to go. Consensus should be reached instead. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

The second paragraph in the career section definitely needs a work over, and I think more detail needs to go into the qualification/quota process. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 20:29, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Kelapstick Care to take a whack at it? I don't understand this sports thing, so I'd make a hash of it. Though if the problem persists I may take a stab at it in a couple of days. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:14, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Ser Amantio di Nicolao I have tried three times and keep quitting, its a tough one to describe, but I will give it another go. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 15:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Ser Amantio di Nicolao not adhering to Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons Policy

Ser Amantio di Nicolao is not using a NPOV point of view. In addition, it is also possible that Ser Amantio di Nicolao may not be using all articles which use Verifiability, another violation of Wikipedia's policy. there's no verifiable "critics" that have called the performance a "mockery". If you wish to include this line, please list at least one of the "critics" which call this a mockery. User Kittenpow has included additional articles which add to the neutral point of view, however these have been deleted by Ser Amantio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittenpow (talk • contribs) 18:27, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Kittenpow: Please show me where I have removed information from this article since Kelapstick began expanding it. I have done nothing of the kind. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Kittenpow that is sourced to an NPR article, which is a reliable source, despite it referencing an Instagram account within the NPR article. Your continuing to remove content referenced by reliable sources that you do not like is disruptive, and if you continue you will be blocked again. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 15:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Additionally the CBS Sports article explicitly states As you'd imagine, plenty of legitimate (i.e. talented) Olympic athletes in South Korea are not exactly thrilled with Swaney making a mockery of the process and securing a "competitive" spot through technicalities. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 15:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)