| Revision as of 02:14, 22 July 2013 editViriditas (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers169,765 edits →Oh My God: re← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:03, 22 July 2013 edit undoPetrarchan47 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users14,771 edits →Oh My GodNext edit → | ||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
| ::Misplaced Pages has been absolutely overrun by shills. Big Oil and government special interests (is there a difference?) are well established here, but the GMO promoters are ''absolutely out of control''. The problem, as I see it, is that the Ayn Rand-loving co-founder of this site is perfectly OK with giant corporations taking an equally giant role in building and shaping 'their' articles. BP, for instance, was writing their own drafts and having shills, er, independent BP-friendly editors, insert the drafts word-for-word. These included sections on their most controversial endeavors like Tar Sands and various oil spills. When brought to Jimbo, the response was a big yawn and a full throated defense of the practice, of BP and everyone involved. Because of the tag teaming and the relatively recent switch from rational RfCs to allowing straight-up voting by literally anyone, regardless of their knowledge of the subject, the RfC process has become a complete joke and really, an invitation for special interests to solidify their positions. IMHO, this is really no longer a place for honest editors - unless they don't mind having their time wasted. At the end of the day, the establishment will . '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px #B8B8B8;">]]]</span>''' 00:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC) | ::Misplaced Pages has been absolutely overrun by shills. Big Oil and government special interests (is there a difference?) are well established here, but the GMO promoters are ''absolutely out of control''. The problem, as I see it, is that the Ayn Rand-loving co-founder of this site is perfectly OK with giant corporations taking an equally giant role in building and shaping 'their' articles. BP, for instance, was writing their own drafts and having shills, er, independent BP-friendly editors, insert the drafts word-for-word. These included sections on their most controversial endeavors like Tar Sands and various oil spills. When brought to Jimbo, the response was a big yawn and a full throated defense of the practice, of BP and everyone involved. Because of the tag teaming and the relatively recent switch from rational RfCs to allowing straight-up voting by literally anyone, regardless of their knowledge of the subject, the RfC process has become a complete joke and really, an invitation for special interests to solidify their positions. IMHO, this is really no longer a place for honest editors - unless they don't mind having their time wasted. At the end of the day, the establishment will . '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px #B8B8B8;">]]]</span>''' 00:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :::Petrarchan47, are you referring to the removal of your edits? Have you considered starting a talk page discussion? ] (]) 02:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC) | :::Petrarchan47, are you referring to the removal of your edits? Have you considered starting a talk page discussion? ] (]) 02:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ::::V, to be frank, I think what I'm expressing is a nearly complete loss of interest in further contributing to this encyclopedia. Our edits are always removed or changed at the expense of 'regular people' (or, the 99%), and in favor of special interests. I do not see good results from talk page activity anymore. I do not see administrators following the rules, or encouraging each other to do so. I see this website as so massively slanted in favor of special interests that it is not justifiable for me to continue to support this project in any time-consuming way. The only article I've worked on lately that does not seem to be ruled by a special interest 'editor' or group of shills is ]. It is collaborative, with mutual respect and no government rep (surprisingly!) policing every edit (as happens at any page related the the BP oil spill or any page that mentions GMOs). It is an atmosphere that reminds me of the old days, when people just enjoyed building articles and adding information. Now 98% of the activity I see here is about spinning articles. It's about keeping information damning to the powers-that-be out of this website, or told in a pretty way. The MAM page remains an example of this type of activity that is ''absolutely mind boggling''. People ''are'' being paid to do this work, and that is precisely why it feels like one's time is being wasted here. The vast majority of the editors I bump into here these days are ''not'' straight-shooters. This seems to be a somewhat new phenomenon, but it is blossoming out of control with no brakes in sight. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px #B8B8B8;">]]]</span>''' 06:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:03, 22 July 2013
 | In this world, hatred has never been defeated by hatred. Only love can overcome hatred. This is an ancient and eternal law. –Dhammapada (1:5) |
| This is a subpage of Viriditas's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Disambiguation link notification for July 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acid Dreams (book), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rockefeller Commission (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Template collapsing
You are free to change the autocollapse parameter in {{Frank Lloyd Wright}} as you see fit for individual pages or globally.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
AN/I
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Gobbleygook (talk) 07:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Habitability of red dwarf systems
You are invited to work on User:Wer900/Habitability of red dwarf systems, as I improve it significantly until it can be brought to GA class. Your aid is most appreciated. Thanks, Wer900 • talk 23:29, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. That's a very interesting (and valuable) topic. I will take a look. Viriditas (talk) 02:11, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Allegations of CIA drug trafficking
Hi,
Since you're working on Acid Dreams (book), I thought you might also be interested in Allegations of CIA drug trafficking. It's been on my list of problem articles for some time. I removed the most egregiously bad sources but there are still some very significant issues. There's legitimate some stuff in the article, but there's also some very dubious, fringe material. Best, GabrielF (talk) 03:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll take a look but it sounds like a can of worms. Viriditas (talk) 05:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- I took a look. There are several ways to approach this, but from past experience, the "scalpel" method would work best, i.e. slash and burn. Viriditas (talk) 04:27, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Template:Wikinews
I was wondering if we should do something about these. While the occasional links could be useful, it does seem like a lot of them are bad, and it's not really a WP:RS. Adam Cuerden 09:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- It's an interesting question. I seem to remember there was an intense discussion about this very thing many years ago. I'll try and find it. Viriditas (talk) 04:18, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- In the meantime, I think I'll handle the ones that I can provide concrete evidence of being bad links. Misplaced Pages:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_July_14#Template:Wikinews_category. The categorization scheme on Wikinews is so broad (the mere mention in one sentence is often enough) that it's essentially useless for Misplaced Pages's purpose. Adam Cuerden 22:49, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
A very sensitive touchpad! Happens all too often, just need to breath on it and it executes an unwanted command! Leaky Caldron 11:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
- Tell me about it!! :) Viriditas (talk) 11:35, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Gobbleygook
A tag has been placed on User:Gobbleygook, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done for the following reason:
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Misplaced Pages criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. 155blue (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Oh My God
How do you handle the bullshit? Even my watch list is giving me heart palpitations, I'm taking MAM off of it. Dude, I hope you have a strong heart. I am gathering that you do. petrarchan47tc 01:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
- Tag teaming, suspected socks engaging in COI edits promoting a singular POV while using off-topic sources in violation of our no original research policy. Who do you think is going to get blocked here, me or them? Take a look at my block log if you aren't sure. Viriditas (talk) 01:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
- What a pile of crap from Gobbleygook and company. You rightly pointed out, many times, that no long-term studies have been done. Sometimes it is important to read beyond abstracts and Monsanto press releases, but of course the biased, drama-creating, and sometimes paid corporate shills on the 'pedia will gather their friendly admins and editors to community-ban you for "repeated insiviliteh!!!!!!111!11!!" while having free rein to ignore all facts, truth, and nuance in papers. Wer900 • talk 01:22, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages has been absolutely overrun by shills. Big Oil and government special interests (is there a difference?) are well established here, but the GMO promoters are absolutely out of control. The problem, as I see it, is that the Ayn Rand-loving co-founder of this site is perfectly OK with giant corporations taking an equally giant role in building and shaping 'their' articles. BP, for instance, was writing their own drafts and having shills, er, independent BP-friendly editors, insert the drafts word-for-word. These included sections on their most controversial endeavors like Tar Sands and various oil spills. When brought to Jimbo, the response was a big yawn and a full throated defense of the practice, of BP and everyone involved. Because of the tag teaming and the relatively recent switch from rational RfCs to allowing straight-up voting by literally anyone, regardless of their knowledge of the subject, the RfC process has become a complete joke and really, an invitation for special interests to solidify their positions. IMHO, this is really no longer a place for honest editors - unless they don't mind having their time wasted. At the end of the day, the establishment will have their way. petrarchan47tc 00:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- Petrarchan47, are you referring to the removal of your edits? Have you considered starting a talk page discussion? Viriditas (talk) 02:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- V, to be frank, I think what I'm expressing is a nearly complete loss of interest in further contributing to this encyclopedia. Our edits are always removed or changed at the expense of 'regular people' (or, the 99%), and in favor of special interests. I do not see good results from talk page activity anymore. I do not see administrators following the rules, or encouraging each other to do so. I see this website as so massively slanted in favor of special interests that it is not justifiable for me to continue to support this project in any time-consuming way. The only article I've worked on lately that does not seem to be ruled by a special interest 'editor' or group of shills is Edward Snowden. It is collaborative, with mutual respect and no government rep (surprisingly!) policing every edit (as happens at any page related the the BP oil spill or any page that mentions GMOs). It is an atmosphere that reminds me of the old days, when people just enjoyed building articles and adding information. Now 98% of the activity I see here is about spinning articles. It's about keeping information damning to the powers-that-be out of this website, or told in a pretty way. The MAM page remains an example of this type of activity that is absolutely mind boggling. People are being paid to do this work, and that is precisely why it feels like one's time is being wasted here. The vast majority of the editors I bump into here these days are not straight-shooters. This seems to be a somewhat new phenomenon, but it is blossoming out of control with no brakes in sight. petrarchan47tc 06:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- Petrarchan47, are you referring to the removal of your edits? Have you considered starting a talk page discussion? Viriditas (talk) 02:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages has been absolutely overrun by shills. Big Oil and government special interests (is there a difference?) are well established here, but the GMO promoters are absolutely out of control. The problem, as I see it, is that the Ayn Rand-loving co-founder of this site is perfectly OK with giant corporations taking an equally giant role in building and shaping 'their' articles. BP, for instance, was writing their own drafts and having shills, er, independent BP-friendly editors, insert the drafts word-for-word. These included sections on their most controversial endeavors like Tar Sands and various oil spills. When brought to Jimbo, the response was a big yawn and a full throated defense of the practice, of BP and everyone involved. Because of the tag teaming and the relatively recent switch from rational RfCs to allowing straight-up voting by literally anyone, regardless of their knowledge of the subject, the RfC process has become a complete joke and really, an invitation for special interests to solidify their positions. IMHO, this is really no longer a place for honest editors - unless they don't mind having their time wasted. At the end of the day, the establishment will have their way. petrarchan47tc 00:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)