User:Marketdiamond/SteelerNation

This is part of a Wikipedia user page, not an encyclopedia article.

1) WP:SOURCES & Proving a negative should place responsibility on those adding Cizmar's piece. "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Sources should directly support the material presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. In general, the best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments; as a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source."

2) Thus deletion of whitetrash & hillbilly is needed until Cizmar's QED is supported of "youtube", "trailerpark", and Examiner sources connecting Appalachia to those phrases. Violations of RDFLG, FRNG, and QS IMO.

3) Cizmars QED fails V, WEIGHT, VNT when a graphic representation of Markets1 Markets2 Radio Markets3 Markets4 Markets5 App1 App2. An editor (falsely) assailed these outside links (or the graphically combined representation of them) as WP:OR but that is simply what is necessary when forced to Prove a negative to Cizmars few testable and clumsily combined anecdotes.

4) It should be COMMONSENSE that a broad fanbase can't be ENCYCLOPEDICALLY referenced as: hillbilly: frequently considered derogatory, and so is usually offensive to those Americans of Appalachian heritage""untrammeled white citizen of Alabama""the poor, ignorant, feuding family"" socially backward people . . . In this context, it is often (though not always) derogatory""hillbilly is substituted in place of more disparaging terms, such as white trash.
Whitetrash: "a pejorative used by house slaves against poor whites""outcasts from respectable society living on the fringes""seen as dangerous""may be criminal, unpredictable, and without respect for authority""The term is usually a slur" based on 1 opinion piece.

5) IMO OFFENSIVE to inject racial/ethnic slurs into a broad fanbase even if it has a citation.

6) I.e. Phoenix New Time's Cizmar calls Super Bowl a gimmick, but it was declined on Wikipedia.

7) Phoenix New Time fits into the wiki description of: "eschews comprehensive coverage of general news in favor of stylized reporting, opinionated reviews and columns, investigations into edgy topics and magazine-style feature stories highlighting local people and culture. Their news coverage is more locally-focused" and its parent is the largest source for Internet adult listings and infamous for anti-monopoly and sex lawsuits and was the target of major petitions and corporate concern over business

8) Cizmars racial/ethnic piece IMO is a take on the Dihydrogen monoxide hoax, faulty logic should be dismissed.

9) Cizmar, though called a competent reporter, is/was the "music editor" at PNT and elsewhere, and has been outed by media sources as a Cleveland native and presumably a hardcore Cleveland fan. This not only brings massive ignorance on the intricacies of the business and borders of a sports fanbase (comparable to a "food" editor writing about nuclear physics etc.) but exposes that the reporter could not approach the subject in an objective non-biased manner. It would be as if Eugene McCarthy was writing about the Democratic Party, is there any doubt how that article would turn out . . . even if McCarthy was 100% accurate its moot, he is also 100% biased. Marketdiamond (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2012 (UTC)