User talk:CatoUticensis

Please stop removing sourced information from articles. If you disagree with content, you are free to politely bring it up on the article talk page, with your own sources that refute the information in the article. Please follow WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and WP:NPA. Continued blanking of sourced information may be seen as vandalism. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 19:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are saying (though disagree with it), but I've given you the tools. Present your own sources. NYT is an acceptable source well known for accuracy. It occasionally has problems, but so does Fox, CNN, BBC, and everyone else. You know what you have to do.

In addition, I'd point out that you are incorrect on your statements on Iraq. Especially following the Iranian revolution, Iraq ended up being a client of both East and West camps. They were supported by the US as an opponent to Iranian influence in the region, defended politically by the West when attacked by Israel in 1981, etc. They were not solely a Soviet satellite. The Middle East was far more complicated in this respect than Eastern Europe or Southeast Asia.

As I've said, though, you know what you need to do. Outright blanking of sourced material isn't it. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 22:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would also point out to you that the NYT is not the only source in the section you are blanking. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 22:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've told you what you need to do. Continuing to argue this on my talk page (particularly in a denial of history and partisan attack fashion, rather than presenting sources) isn't it. Please do the right thing, otherwise eventually an administrator will get involved. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 07:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]