Eisspeedway

User talk:Ikip: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Ikip (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 21: Line 21:


::I wanted to move my sections on the Fascism and Conservatism in the Talk page to the main page of RfC:Collect and wonder if you could do this for me as I am not familiar on what formatting and presentation is required. [[User:The Four Deuces|The Four Deuces]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 22:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
::I wanted to move my sections on the Fascism and Conservatism in the Talk page to the main page of RfC:Collect and wonder if you could do this for me as I am not familiar on what formatting and presentation is required. [[User:The Four Deuces|The Four Deuces]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 22:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

==barnstar==
Thanks, whilst I am nominating some articles for deletion, I can assure you I do not nominate most I see for deletion. I have also created about 6 new articles on X-Y relations. [[User:LibStar|LibStar]] ([[User talk:LibStar|talk]]) 03:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:12, 5 May 2009

"Disagreeable and closed to new ideas - that's the picture that emerges of contributors to...Wikipedia from a survey of their psychological attributes." Aldhous, Peter (January 03, 2009). "Psychologist finds Wikipedians grumpy and closed-minded". NewScientist. Retrieved 2009-05-08. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) Source: "Personality Characteristics of Wikipedia Members" CyberPsychology & Behavior (DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0225)

This project does not exist to help editors grow a thicker skin. Our mission is to build an encyclopedia, not establish limits for low-level abuse that we think our volunteer editors should be willing to suffer. If we drive away more people than we attract, then it's a genuine loss to the project and we should fix it rather than label those who would prefer to work in a civil environment as "thin skinned." -- User:Cool Hand Luke [2]

The problem is that our enforcement of civility and NPA has historically been quite selective. If you're unpopular or unpowerful and criticizing somebody popular or powerful, you are likely to be blocked. The other way around, not so much. We ought to come up with objective standards and stick to them. -- User:Jehochman[3]

A reliable measure of prejudice is how many mistakes a person gets forgiven. --Durova

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard/RfA_Report

...as an approximate guide, you are likely to pass if you achieve at least 75% support. Nominations which receive less than 70% support are unlikely to be successful, except in exceptional circumstances.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Best welcome template: User:AxG/WikiWelcome1

wikipediareview: History of wikipedia


more for the list

RE: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Collect‎

[4]. you could use this as an example of not getting along well w/ others, strawman arguments, general rudeness ("I have now editted well over 250 pages -- and I think you have not. Thabnks! And please feel free not to reply. Collect (talk) 11:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)") or a new section composed of his false accusations w/out apology or acknowledgment. or you dont have to use this at all. i just thought it was a good example of poor behavior on his part. Brendan19 (talk) 07:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be much more convincing if you created your own section, or added this to your section. I am going over 5,000 edits, so it is hard to add everything, even with the magic of collapsible sections. Ikip (talk) 13:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ikip. Here are a series of deletions on Joe the Plumber that you were also involved with. This would fall under the section of deleting well sourced content:

[5] [6], [7], [8]

I'm personally fine adding these to my section, but yours is very well structured and helpful so I'll follow your recommendation. Also this cite (already in the list above) [9] shows Collect reintroducing OR, where he brings in legal research and applies to Joe.Mattnad (talk) 14:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I give both you and Brendan19 permission to edit my section. Ikip. 14:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to move my sections on the Fascism and Conservatism in the Talk page to the main page of RfC:Collect and wonder if you could do this for me as I am not familiar on what formatting and presentation is required. The Four Deuces (talk) 22:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

Thanks, whilst I am nominating some articles for deletion, I can assure you I do not nominate most I see for deletion. I have also created about 6 new articles on X-Y relations. LibStar (talk) 03:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]