→Jewish Messiah Claimants: another opinion |
→Participation in AfDs: new section |
||
Line 138: | Line 138: | ||
--[[User:Lfrankbalm|Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out]] ([[User talk:Lfrankbalm#top|talk]]) 04:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC) |
--[[User:Lfrankbalm|Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out]] ([[User talk:Lfrankbalm#top|talk]]) 04:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC) |
||
== Participation in AfDs == |
|||
Hi, when participating at AfD, you are required to give a reason for a !vote - you cannot simply state "delete", as you did at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doc Mentillo]], or else your contribution to the discussion will be ignored. For more information, see [[WP:DISCUSSAFD]]. Thanks, [[User:Ansh666|ansh]]''[[User talk:Ansh666|666]]'' 20:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:25, 3 November 2014
Re: DRB for Gonzalo Lira Comment
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, I've opened the dispute for Gonzalo Lira here. I have no opinion either way on this matter. I suggest that before you make any reverts or additions on Gonzo Lira you should divest them in that discussion. WP is a medium of consensus, so any edits or reverts from here on should be discussed, each item and it's source. I hope I can help you both to come to some type of agreement.JacobiJonesJr (talk) 06:19, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Editing of Your User Talk Page
I was uncertain of this and I checked; "Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered users, from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of material from a user page is normally taken to mean that the user has read and is aware of its contents." [1]
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Impressions of Wikipedia.
I am starting to agree with an assessment, supported by yet another dead link, "from" a Duke University professor that listed some major concerns about Wikipedia.
Basically;
- --The only way that Wikipedia is any way useful, relates proportionally to the quality of the underlying primary source cited.
- ---"You may also be able to track opinions or deeper ideas back to their original sources."[2]
- --Unfortunately, primary references cannot be consistently found, cannot be properly organized, are of random quality, rarely are cited properly, or cannot retain persistence within an electronic framework.
For the most part, readers are consuming nothing more than entertainment self-promotion, and marketing all within a highly-dissonant-framework of ignorance and bias.
- -And ignorance it is having actually read two position papers used as references to support opinions that did not even align in any way with the conclusions of either document. The position papers asking questions rather than drawing predisposed conclusions.
- "--To the casual reader, much of Wikipedia appears adequate, but be warned, nothing can be trusted."[3] Would you drive your car if you could not trust it to get from point A to B? The answer of course would be no.
Until I edited an entry or two I really did not realize how dangerously-worthless the sixth most popular internet site actually is.[4] Experts get things wrong all the time, but a group of random ignoramuses will never get anything right.
I have closed accounts on other "top" sites including Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Linkden, Blogspot, and I don't use Ebay or Amazon, and try not to use Paypal. It looks life Wikipedia has to be on the ignore list as well simply because it is totally unreliable.
Personal attacks by MILH
I'm sorry that I did not fully grasp the depth of the situation when you alerted me on my talk page about the personal attacks being levied at you by user MILH. Now that I have had some time to research the issue, and I'm aware of these blatant and chronic violations, I have issued a strong warning on their user talk page. Wikipedia administrators will not tolerate such attacks, threats and bullying if they continue. You can view the warning and summary of the attacks here. I'm sorry that you have had to endure this abuse but hope that this misbehavior will now be corrected and we can all move on to our main purpose of improving the quality of the encyclopedia. Best, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 13:41, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Stubborn Entry
I had some bad luck selecting my first edit because it was "stubbornly" defend against all logic and reason.
Wikipedia as a Vanity Press
The use of Wikipedia as a Vanity Press is a fundamental misuse of this platform. A Wikipedia page can provide a legitimizing credential in and of itself.
- -This is a clear example Marc Seifer providing an Example of a Vanity Resume-Like Entry, Do we need to know that Seifer was influenced by Kukla Fran and Ollie
References
- ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_pages#Removal_of_comments.2C_notices.2C_and_warnings
- ^ http://writing.yalecollege.yale.edu/advice-students/using-sources/citing-internet-sources/wikipedia
- ^ http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/wikipedia-where-truth-dies-online/14963#.VCv2sitdXrM
- ^ http://www.alexa.com/topsites
Please comment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)#Bullpen_catchers Alex (talk) 22:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Seifer and Jewish Messiah Claimants and Intractable Ebike Laws
Seifer
Lots of work on the Seifer entry and we have a fellow, to my surprise, that is in fact notable as an expert on Tesla. Seifer also appeals to a bunch of fringe-alien-conspiracy-ignoramuses who may have abducted his Wikipedia page and filled in up with fluff, or it could have been a vanity entry.. In any regards, it is now concise, factual, quality referenced, and polished. Lets see if it lasts!
Jewish Messiah Claimants
I was attacked by a Swarm of Yeshivas-ites who will debate and preserve theocratic special interest to death. The oppression of this majority won out.
- I have never attended a Yeshiva and there is nothing "theocratic" about this topic, which is notable because it has been discussed extensively in a multitude of eminently reliable sources. No one "attacked" you, they just disagreed with you, which is routine and expected in deletion debates. You might want to try assuming good faith of other editors, instead of impugning their motives. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:43, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Intractable Ebike laws in NY
Vested interest (bias and ignoramuses) attempted to revert fact in re NYS electric bicycle laws to suit their own misguided purpose, for fun, or simply for dissonance-rationalizations sake. How long will the truth on this matter hold? Don't hold your breath!
Will Wiki-ignorance prevail
I think it will, you can lead a Wikipedia editor to the truth but you cannot make him think.
Star Log --Lfrankblam (talk) 04:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC), Kirk out
Apartheid Lives on Wikipeida
The Wikipeida-bot suggested I edit White people in Zimbabwe I am sure that White and Black people alike will make this very difficult if not impossible to do. It is as if Apartheid still lives on within Wikipedia. I am not alone in finding humor in this;
From 2008
"Really, guys? Whites in Zimbabwe? You really wrote an entire article about it? With photos of white people from Zimbabwe? Yikes."
My suggestion;
Elements of this article-entry belong either in History of Zimbabwe or Demographics of Zimbabwe
Low and behold that we have a White South African;
So I guess Apartheid is alive and well in Wikipedia.. this is too funny to be true.
Merging of pages anyone?
--Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Participation in AfDs
Hi, when participating at AfD, you are required to give a reason for a !vote - you cannot simply state "delete", as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doc Mentillo, or else your contribution to the discussion will be ignored. For more information, see WP:DISCUSSAFD. Thanks, ansh666 20:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)