Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
Although I told SlimVirgin I never said any such nonsense, he has to date not apologized for such a gross distortion of facts. [[User:FuelWagon|FuelWagon]] 21:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC) |
Although I told SlimVirgin I never said any such nonsense, he has to date not apologized for such a gross distortion of facts. [[User:FuelWagon|FuelWagon]] 21:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC) |
||
The benefits of adminship is never having to admit you're wrong and never having to say you're sorry. [[User:FuelWagon|FuelWagon]] 21:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC) |
|||
==Ed Poor== |
==Ed Poor== |
Revision as of 21:32, 12 July 2005
vandalism
click here to report vandalism in progress [[1]] Click once, and then you'll have to wait a few seconds. It takes a while.
wikipedia links
- The wikipedia Help page is here
- The wikipedia FAQ is here
- How to archive a talk page is explained here
You have the patience of a saint, my friend. You're an inspiration. I have a far lower frustration threshhold than you apparently do. Keep up the good work. --AStanhope 21:41, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, FuelWagon, for reformatting my Let's go sentence by sentence post. Given the size the talk page now is, that'll sure make any contributions easier for the users. Duckecho 16:36, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Ghost, that's a very generous way of saying this editor is a partisan hack. - LOL. Of course, but that's my style, my friend....If I give them enough rope, they'll save me the trouble of a hanging...--ghost 5 July 2005 14:54 (UTC)
Mediation
The request for mediation on the Terri Schiavo article is here.
- I've been asked by ghost to step in as Mediator. How do you feel about that? And where (if anywhere) shall we discuss all this? -- Uncle Ed (talk) 23:02, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
- Please meet me at Talk:Terri Schiavo/Mediation. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 00:22, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
NCdave
RFC on NCdave
I have filed a request for comment on NCdave. You can visit the page by going here. I have left this message on your talk page since you have been involved in the dispute resolution process regarding his edits in the past. Mike H 11:31, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
Editor comments on NCdave
I will now commence chuckling and knee-slapping
Just wanted to let you know that I am officially appropriating the phrase "Whack-a-Mole logic game" for my own use, that is excellent. Been trying to think of a succint way to describe NCdave's style of debate for a while now.
Fox1 08:11, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
(And the "whack-a-mole logic game" is brilliant.)Mia-Cle 01:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
As you saw, friend NCdave is back and has put the NPOV tag on twice. Be on the lookout for more of the same. I'm concerned about taking it out a third time. Duckecho 01:06, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Also, I apparently I have a fan club. A W-a-M stalker is following me around and posting stuff addressed to me at other peoples' talk pages. I'm sure he'll do it here. I know you'll know how to handle it.
- I have asked for disciplinary measures against NCDave on Talk:Terri Schiavo/Mediation#It's time to deal with the bully. I ask for your support.--ghost 19:49, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Mediator's Announcement
You are invited to participate in the Mediation regarding the Terry Schiavo article. Initial discussion is beginning at Talk:Terri Schiavo/Mediation. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 20:28, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
I admit to my own POV on Intelligent Design (I'm neo-Pagan), so having another Wikipedian that I know telling me when I'm being stupid would be very helpful. I respect your work on all things Terri Schiavo, and hope I can enlist your help.--ghost 21:21, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
In the future, refrain from deleting my comments. --goethean ॐ 04:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
the New Yorker had an excellent piece on Intelligent Design a few weeks ago--I recommend it as a good read if you didn't catch it. (I actually haven't read the I.D. page on wikipedia though, so I don't know if it would be helpful.)--Mia-Cle 00:24, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say the usefulness of that article has decreased since the recent edits of User:Hbomb and User:Ed Poor (beginning around May 12). It is confusing, and it seems to intentionally obscure the basic facts of the maneuver. --CSTAR 20:08, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
Apology accepted. I'll take a look at it. I found some good stuff on the reaction to "THE DEAL" made on Monday, and I'll add it at some point. Dave (talk) 04:46, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
The goal of my edits was not to water down Democratic criticisms but to present the same criticisms in a more clearly neutral point of view. I'm actually sympathetic to the Democratic position in this debate, but that position is stronger when the points made are clearly neutrally stating facts rather than coming across (when read by someone who favors the nuclear option) as attacks or accusations. I think the article as a whole is superb and have directed people who don't understand why anyone would oppose the nuclear option to read the article. I'm just trying to look for statements that would be perceived as possibly biased in their presentation and restate them to convey the same information in a way that doesn't raise red-flags.
I would be very happy to coordinate with you to find mutually acceptable wording for statements you feel have been watered down. I'll kick some proposed wording out for you-- would you prefer that it be here or on the Nuclear Option talk page? --Naltrexone (talk)
- Fuel, double-checking before I jump in. Did you get my response? Is the invite still open, or should we discuss it further?--ghost 15:14, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- FW, "I'm goin in Maverick..."--ghost 18:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Goethean's opinion
- Since you seem to have it all figured out over there, perhaps you should spend your time there too. FuelWagon 7 July 2005 18:04 (UTC)
I ignored your last invitation to leave Wikipedia, but I did see it. In response, I suggest that you look into the very basic principles of civility that the Wikipedia requires for its members. I think that you're an asshole too, but I decline to attack you personally. Perhaps you should consider a similar approach. --goethean ॐ 7 July 2005 18:11 (UTC)
Schiavo, of course
Yo Fuel, you know I think you're the shit. That being said, maybe you could try and get your message across without all capitals and without swear words (or calling SlimVirgin a jerk and an asshole etc etc). Keeping it civil will give you a slightly better chance of getting your message across. Of course, if that doesn't work, then I think Wiki policy allows you to kill them. Proto t c 14:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
- What Proto the wise said. Fuel, we all know you mean well, and we know you're pissed about some of the things the new contributor wrote. She has certainly played a very significant role in escalating this, in a manner very unlike what one would expect from an experienced editor and administrator. However, the cursing might get you banned, which would be a loss to Wikipedia and all the projects you've worked on. Take a deep breath before you post next on the issue. I'll be saying my piece shortly.~ Neuroscientist | T | C → 18:37, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
FuelWagon, I think that both SlimVirgin and yourself are valuable editors. With that said, how would you feel about removing personal attacks from the talk page? Just put a note in the summary field; I would much rather have you do it than someone else, plus it would show goodwill on your part. See Wikipedia:Remove_personal_attacks. --Viriditas | Talk 19:47, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
SlimVirgin quote
SlimVirgin wrote "But I feel that FuelWagon and Duckecho are POV pushing too by insisting, for example, that no dissenting voice be heard in the intro."
Although I told SlimVirgin I never said any such nonsense, he has to date not apologized for such a gross distortion of facts. FuelWagon 21:19, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
The benefits of adminship is never having to admit you're wrong and never having to say you're sorry. FuelWagon 21:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Ed Poor
Your user name or IP address has been blocked by Ed Poor.
You can email Ed Poor or one of the other administrators to discuss the block.
ok, click on email Ed Poor
This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users.
(swell)