AniMate
Please read the best essay ever written about Wikipedia by Antandrus.
 |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
| No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
You are added on this list. If this is mistake you can delete your name from this list.--Rjecina (talk) 00:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Point taken. Sorry for mistake--Rjecina (talk) 04:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Glutton
The major problem I see is the complete and utter disregard for finding sources for information. Every article I see (take Serbs of Croatia) attempts to throw in the same historical information without sources and everyone wastes time figuring out ways to get their spin in different places. For examples, the history section in Serbs of Croatia should be a history of the movements of Serbian people into the Croatian land, not the same history that's repeated everywhere, each one with a different set of people trying to spin it their own ways. The only solution I see if some admin just goes in and strip every single article of everything without a source (like I tried here as people sat around saying "I think he's Serbian, no he's not") lock the pages and block people for screwing around. If everyone had to prove a source for their arguments, the whole thing would be a lot better off. Then, everyone is on the same page. Right now, it's just a game of who can bring in the most sock and meat puppets for their random spin until they drive the other side off. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
My draft of Freemasonry in NA article
Thanks for your comments AniMate... I know my draft does not include sources yet... that's why it is in my user space as a draft and not yet posted as an article. :>)
More importantly, thanks for spending a bit of time to look at the articles in question and give a neutral, third party view of their flaws and how to correct them. Blueboar (talk) 12:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
The Political Cesspool
My user talk page isn't the place for you two to hash out your political disagreements. AniMate 21:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
| Discussion closed. |
|---|
|
I don't know how to use Wikipedia too well so I apologize in advance if I'm using this feature the wrong way. With that said, feel free to keep an eye on The Political Cesspool page. The same person (probably one of their own staff members) keeps vandalizing the page into his version of it with no sources as opposed to the version that we want to keep it as. Rock8591 03:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC) - - - - - True, I got your recent message. I think Winston's recent attempts to drastically change the content of the page would be considered vandalism, which is why I reverted the page back to its original state give the way the page is and has been for a while. Rock8591 07:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Except for possibly one instance, there is nothing in what I wrote that could be considered offensive or incorrect, and I am willing to modify that one instance. My article offers a benign and matter-of-fact definition as to The Political Cesspool’s content, hosts, and history, whereas the truly offensive article relies on sources that are mere opinions and knee-jerk declarations of extremist and hateful organizations (the SPLC and Media Matters). The only proof offered to support the assertion that I am Harold Covington is from the SPLC (which later re-hashed their original article sans the false assertion that I am Covington). Anyone who has researched the issue knows that Covington lives somewhere in the northwestern U.S., whereas my live presence on the show clearly proves that I live in the Millington, TN area. Since Wikipedia is supposedly so "big" on citing sources, Wikipedia should demand that the SPLC article provide proof and sources for my "real identity" before allowing it to be cited as an authoritative source. The SPLC provides neither proof nor sources; they simply declare it, falsely. And Wikipedia gladly perpetuates the falsehood. As long as Wikipedia continues to perpetuate the false association between myself and Covington, Wikipedia perpetuates its de facto association with the SPLC - an association that seriously undermines Wikipedia's credibility and benefits only the nefarious SPLC. The basis for the SPLC falsely claiming and Wikipedia ignorantly perpetuating the lie that I am Covington is the fallacious notion that Smith families ceased to name their sons “Winston” after 1948. There is no reason whatsoever for men to not be named Winston Smith, and there are many of us so-named. Here are just a few: http://www.outreach.olemiss.edu/events/compass_group/speakers.html http://umasshoops.com/history/alumni/smith_winston/ http://www.drexeldragons.com/News/mbball/2008/7/16/WSmith-COBO.asp?path=mbball http://www.presbyweb.com/2002/Letters/011803.htm http://www.dep.state.fl.us/secretary/news/2004/tal/epa_letter.pdf http://www.auburn.edu/~lakwean/johnnyray_history_smitht.html http://www.rwu.edu/depository/publicaffairs/ishmael_beah_092507.pdf http://www.themq.com/index.php?articles_id=260&issue=114 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t3/memoranda/orgsolve.pdf http://gvcwinstar.net/about_executive.htm http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20000221/business/b1.html So much for Rock8591’s recommendation, “In that case, I advise you to Google this up and you'll find plenty of agreement that "Winston Smith" is Harold Covington.” Such shoddy “research method” proves that Rock8591 is also an unreliable source, especially when you remember that all the allegations that I am Covington are merely repetitions of the unproven and un-sourced SPLC declaration. Following his “logic” that a Google search constitutes proof, I could just as legitimately Google “Jews” and conclude that Jews are the most odious creatures on Earth (something that I absolutely do not believe). After all, a Google search of the word results in lots and lots of articles disparaging Jews; apparently, there's plenty of agreement. Regarding our guest list, having a guest on the show for an interview does not necessarily mean or imply that we agree with that guest’s opinions. I have interviewed many guests with whom I strongly disagree. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer interviewed David Duke; in fact, CNN has an huge guest list of people with whom it disagrees in varying levels of disparity. And just as it is unfair to assume CNN’s agreement with its guest, it is equally unfair to assume our agreement with our guests. I do not wish to be associated with Harold Covington, and I doubt he wants to be associated with me. One person on the discussion page wisely and fairly suggests, “The host Winston Smith is not Harold Covington. The Southern Poverty Law Center reprint [sic] the article that made that claim later without the claim. It is speculation that Winst [sic] Smith is not this individual's real name. Until someone can confirm, which the SPLC has not and cannot, what this individual [sic] name is, it is best to omit attempting to identify him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.104.83.3 (talk) 21:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)” I demand that Wikipedia correct the lie it is perpetuating. And I object to Wikipedia allowing only the opinions and unproven declarations of political hacks and race-baiting hate-mongers to define us, just as Wikipedia, the SPLC, Media Matters, and Rock8591 would object to me defining them without their participation.
I prefer red herring with dill sauce, if you don't mind, but I'll deal with yours nonetheless. "Oftentimes" hardly means "every time". The Randy Gray interview was about the kidnapping, torture, rape, and murder of Channon Christian and Chris Newsome, not about Randy Gray’s other activities or beliefs. Regardless of what you think of Mr. Gray, what he said about Channon, Chris, and the murderers was true, and I agreed with him because I agree with the truth. And the truth is there is no description too shocking to depict the horror of what Channon and Chris endured, and there is no imprecation too severe to call down upon the perpetrators who so heinously violated them. (Maybe you would care to revise the Wikipedia entry on Channon and Chris to read, "What they went through really wasn't that bad, and the murderers they insulted are actually fine, upstanding, and misunderstood model citizens.") Agreeing with Randy Gray is by far better than agreeing with Morris Dees, which you obviously do, despite Dees being almost universally recognized as a charlatan, not to mention what we know about him from his divorce proceedings. But, he's obviously "your guy." In the future, skip the red herring and stick to the topic, if you can. In case you need a reminder, the topic is the lies in your Wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.253.96 (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC) |
It was stuff that I myself added. I prefer discussion in the Talk page of that article though, as opposed to our user talk sections for more details. Rock8591 23:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock8591 (talk • contribs)
In appreciation of a job well done
|
The Rescue from Deletion Barnstar | |
| In appreciation of your excellent research and editorial skills that resulted in the preservation of the article Steve Brown (yo-yo player). Job well done! Ecoleetage (talk) 16:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC) |
I would be seriously remiss in not paying tribute to very fine work that you accomplished in saving this article. Thanks and be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- My pleasure. I look forward to seeing more of your work. If your schedule permits, perhaps you can look at this item that I just began as a stub: [1]. If you have any suggestions expanding it, I would be appreciative. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm...something weirder than a museum in a nursing home? Okay, I will tighten my thinking cap and report back with appropriately eccentric material. Many thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 10:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- P.S. I don't know if you observe this, but if you do...Happy Rosh Hashanah. Ecoleetage (talk) 10:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm...something weirder than a museum in a nursing home? Okay, I will tighten my thinking cap and report back with appropriately eccentric material. Many thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 10:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
reply
It was constructive. Every time it is mentioned in the news that issue is brought up, so the article should mention it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.153.182.241 (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Secret Invasion
Thanks for backing me up on this edit. It's much appreciated.Shin-Goji —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC).
Sarah's marathon
I agree completely with your removal of the marathon - I was struggling to find a place for it while removing some utter nonsense from the section. Thanks Tvoz/talk 07:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- There's always the Weekly Reader. Tvoz/talk 07:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- I try. Especially at 3AM. Tvoz/talk 08:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought you would like to know, it was User:Dereks1x all along! Sticky Parkin 13:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Not surprised in the least. Hope his account burns in Wikihell. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
User:Onelifefreak2007
<sheepish grin> Oops. Sorry. I DID step over the line. His reactions were amusing to me, which is why I kept goading him. I'm done with him, I promise. BassPlyr23 (talk) 11:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Sarah
Yo Dude
I haven't found anything else on Justis leaving the role of Sarah Roberts on the show except that one article, I don't know if that is true unless I hear it from Soaps.com. It might be true and it might not. I don't think it is true but who knows. How do you get your name like to do two different links. P.J. (talk) 02:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Miroslav Filipović
I am having 1 interesting source about this monster and his children killings [2]. In my thinking there is no point in adding similar sources because my arguments will always be defeated without clear reasons.--Rjecina (talk) 11:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Forgive any old vandalism?
Should we forgive any vandalism if it is old?
At first, I thought the vandalism was just an honest mistake. If it were, the user would say so. He nasty to me and denies making the edit even though the diff is clear, he did.
That's why I think the person needs to be blocked so we can check his work. He might be hiding sneaky vandalism with hundreds of grammatical corrections. Fossett&Elvis (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
This revert...
...deleted all contributions from 79.176.224.2 (talk · contribs) that we discussed in the Request for comment about Jasenovac extermination camp. You seemed to have been of the opinion that they should stay. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so much!
You made my evening wonderful with your award! Thank you! --Enzuru 00:22, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
RfA
Hi AniMate! Thank you very much for your support and insight in my RfA, which passed yesterday. I hope not to let you and the others down and use the tools for the benefit of the project. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 19:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
Hi AniMate, and thanks for supporting my successful request for adminship. It was nice to see all the kind comments I got from my supporters and I hope that I will be more useful to the community now that I have the tools again.--Berig (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC) |
Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California
I noticed you made an edit to Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California earlier today removing a substantial amount of text. The information you removed was important and relevant to the article. I noticed your edit summary was "removing copyvio", can you tell me where you found this text elsewhere or how you know it's copied? Thanks! Grant (talk) 05:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I just started watching the Anaheim Hills article and I wanted to make sure your edit was legitimate. I'm going to try and clean up this article a bit over time. Right now, the language it uses doesn't fit in Wikipedia at all. It reads like it's a marketing brochure for the area. Grant (talk) 06:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
I really wish I hadn't just read the archives of that talk page. ;-) Sounds like a boat-load of no fun trying to improve that article. Oh well, I've already started editing it, and I can't stop now! Grant (talk) 06:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Ancient Persian problems
You recently contributed to an AfD discussion on an article about ancient Persian history. I have been reviewing the contributions of the editors who have been involved in these and other related articles, and have found a considerable number of issues - bad writing, original research, lack of sourcing or citations, and POV problems. I have posted the results of my review at User:ChrisO/Ancient Persian problems (it's a work in progress, as I'm still going through the contributions). Please feel free to add to it as you see fit and leave any comments at User talk:ChrisO/Ancient Persian problems. I would be interested in any feedback that you might have. Thanks in advance.
- Thanks for suggesting that to me AniMate, thats actually a good point, so thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 04:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk
Appreciate what you are doing...
I appreciate that you have decided to mentor Ariobarza, and that you are assuming her to be a good-faith editor. I just wanted to know that I respect you for that decision. I do hope it works out well for both of you and if I can be of any help please let me know. For the record I am a fairly new user myself (6 mos) and still learning my way around, but I also believe her to be a good-faith editor and hope you can help her be a good one as well. :) Tundrabuggy (talk) 04:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I thank you from the bottom up, for you have decided to be my mentor. I read every sentence you wrote me on my talk page, and I consider it correct and from now one I pledge to consult you before any notable edits and follow the policy rules and guidelines of Wikipedia from now on. Finally I consider and hope you promise me that if we are ever going to make a page called, "Campaigns of Cyrus the Great," it should be made as a last resort if none of Cyrus's battles deserve their own articles. Second, if their are certain articles that are too vague, then we should only include the vague battles, and not try to jam it with well sourced articles, which would make "Campaigns" article gigantic. So do you agree, and promise? With best thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 09:24, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza
--Animate, thanks for your note on my talk page. I agree in principle with everything you said. I do have a question for you. Do you have any expertise, knowledge or interest in the era of Cyrus the Great and the available archeological evidence of those times? I would appreciate some objective eyes on a couple of articles mentioned on Chris' subpage, not the battles except maybe Opis, but the ones bemoaned as "POV-pushing", ie Cyrus the Great & Cyrus Cylinder. If you have some spare time...and the interest. Tundrabuggy (talk) 02:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
AniMate I just remembered... I have a request, could you please recover Siege of Kapisa, and paste (with all the sources and links, like <ref-> stuff ext...) the article here User:Ariobarza/Siege of Kapisa (so I can complete it with sources before I ask you if I can recreate the article), I do not care about the talkpage, I'll make talkpage with new information. Thank you soo much!--Ariobarza (talk) 04:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk
- AniMate, I thank you for your request, but just a reminder. I have a hectic month ahead, that is why I made so many battles in my user space, just in case the real life articles are to be deleted. I suggest if you do not have to work on other articles and have some free time to spare on Wikipedia, you can keep adding cited sentences from the books already there and more, whether in my user space or in the real article, but I suggest the user space is the best place to make changes to articles that are about to be deleted soon. So I put them in my user space so no one can delete it for a long time, I hope, as they should ask me first politely. So my appearance on Wikipedia for the next month will be on a 'on' and 'off' basis. But for now I agree to only expand Battle of the Marsyas, as doing this one step at a time is the right thing to do, as you suggested. So whenever I come on Wikipedia we can work together to expand the article, and like I said before, if you have free time, your welcomed to contribute to it. Many thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 23:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk
Siege of Kapisa
I've userified this. dougweller (talk) 10:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)