→September 2008: - don't call me an idiot |
→September 2008: - notify uncivil editor of article probation |
||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] Please stop your disruptive editing{{#if:Barack Obama|, such as the edit you made to [[:Barack Obama]]}}. If your [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] continues, you will be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism3 --> -- [[User:Scjessey|Scjessey]] ([[User talk:Scjessey|talk]]) 16:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC) |
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] Please stop your disruptive editing{{#if:Barack Obama|, such as the edit you made to [[:Barack Obama]]}}. If your [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] continues, you will be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism3 --> -- [[User:Scjessey|Scjessey]] ([[User talk:Scjessey|talk]]) 16:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC) |
||
:Please don't call me an "idiot", and preach about US law (which you seem to be confused about). Also, here is a notification that the article you attempted to shoehorn your "Arab-American" nonsense in is currently under probation -- [[User:Scjessey|Scjessey]] ([[User talk:Scjessey|talk]]) 18:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC) |
:Please don't call me an "idiot", and preach about US law (which you seem to be confused about). Also, here is a notification that the article you attempted to shoehorn your "Arab-American" nonsense in is currently under probation -- [[User:Scjessey|Scjessey]] ([[User talk:Scjessey|talk]]) 18:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC) |
||
[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed{{#if:Barack Obama|, [[:Barack Obama]],}} is on [[Wikipedia:General sanctions|article probation]]. {{#if:Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation|A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at [[:Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation]].|}} {{#if:|{{{3}}}|Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.<br><br>''The above is a [[WP:TEMPLATE|templated message]]. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you.''}}<!-- Template:uw-probation1 --> -- [[User:Scjessey|Scjessey]] ([[User talk:Scjessey|talk]]) 18:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:31, 17 September 2008
As a scientist, I can tell the difference between fact and theory; some editors cannot. As an example, the page "Global Warming" indicates that man-made Global Warming is a fact, although it is really just a popular theory invented by a power grabbing politician. Here are a few things up for debate:
Darwinism
Gefreiter - Evolution was once a theory, and was science. But now it is a theology. It may have scientific consensus, but it has this for more reasons than just being scientifically sound (which it is not). In order for scientists to get jobs or grants, they have to align themselves with the views of whomever is paying. Normally, the people paying are Godless heathens who chose their views because the idea of being morally responsible before an infinite God is uncomfortable. Besides this, scientific consensus does not prove anything true. Scientists once believed that the Earth was flat. This was proven false, as in science theories cannot be proven true. Just give scientists and politicians enough time and they will prove Darwinism wrong and take the theory that is most expedient.
Conservative versus Socialist Liberal
Gefreiter - Everyone knows who Marx, Lenin, and Stalin were, and everyone knows what happened to the USSR. But for some unexplainable reason, people want to follow their examples. Politicians pretend to be for the people, but they only want personal power. They are spitting images of Lenin. People fall prey to their smooth talk all the time. Universal Health Care was one of the promises Lenin made, and kept. The result: millions died. Lenin also promised a wageless, classless society. The result: millions died, everyone equally at the bottom except the pigs. Politicians like Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama promise to take us down the same road. Do you trust them? Charisma is no substitute for brains.
Comments
Gefreiter - Anyone who can refrain from using vulgar language may add to this talk page. I will be able to fix this page quickly in the case of vandalism because I keep backups. Please put your name in bold before you comment and use correct English grammar. The user page will keep highlights from the talk page, and this section will contain comments from users.
Average Joe - Example...
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Gefreiter~enwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Hi there! I see you've talk a talk and user page all set up, but no-one has given you a welcome of any kind. You appear to know what you're doing, but maybe the above welcome with all of its links will be helpful to you anyway. I see that you've posted two things to Talk:Global warming but the second thing was deleted. The editors on Global warming are pretty strict about keeping discussion of the subject itself (instead of the article) off of the talk page simply because it's such a high profile article that the talk page gets a whole lot of discussion about the topic instead of improving the article. It is a Wikipedia guideline, but it's not usually enforced very much on other pages. I hope you don't take the deletion of the second statement personally; I know it's a realy unwelcome thing to see when you're new to the encyclopedia.
If you'd like to improve the article, you need to read the literature cited in the article, and edit the article by using those sources or other reliable sources. If you disagree with existing published literature, Wikipedia is not the place to do anything about it; the criteria for inclusion in this encyclopeida is verifiability, not truth. There are lots of articles on Wikipedia that are really poorly written and really, really need at least one reliable source. It's much easier to improve those sorts of articles, and it's a huge help to the encyclopeida, so I suggest you find something interesting to you and find an article about it that needs work.
Personally, I think that the very best Wikipedia articles are those edited by people that disagree with each other, because both "sides" find better sources to convince the other and remove the nonesense they disagree with (there is a lot of nonesense, or at least nonsensical grammar, on a lot of pages). So please keep editing and make the encyclopedia better. - Enuja (talk) 15:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism to the Barack Obama article
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Barack Obama. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.
[1] --Floridianed (talk) 19:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Take note everyone. This socialist pansy is complaining that my edit was "vandalism." Vandalism is not where you bring to light something that Obama's cult following adamantly suppresses. An example of vandalism: "Obama is a two-bit loser who cannot decide whether or not he represents his mindless, lower class followers. I wish Dick Cheney would kill him with carcinogenic compounds. Obama won't be elected because he messed up on his first executive decision: Joe Biden." While a statement like this is most likely true, it is vandalism. Restated to not be considered vandalism: "Many people consider Obama to be too inexperienced to become president [1]. Some people point out that he frequently changes his stance on issues [2], and they often use his recent mistake of choosing Joe Biden as his running mate as sufficient evidence to support their conclusion [3]. Obama is criticized over his dinner fundraiser which cost $28,500 a plate because he tries to make people see him as representing the poor and lower class, who could not afford to attend [4]. Obama is also criticized for his association with the Daily Kos, who recently stated that they wished Cheney would die of cancer. [5]" While an addition like this may annoy or offend some of Obama's cult gathering, it would not constitute vandalism. Still, left-winged idiots would target the maker of a contribution like this as victims. Gefreiter (talk) 18:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
September 2008
Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Barack Obama. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please don't call me an "idiot", and preach about US law (which you seem to be confused about). Also, here is a notification that the article you attempted to shoehorn your "Arab-American" nonsense in is currently under probation -- Scjessey (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Barack Obama, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.
The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)