| Revision as of 19:27, 29 December 2005 editValjean (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers95,514 edits creating a sandbox← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:10, 20 January 2025 edit undoChompaydm (talk | contribs)38 edits →You are wrong and you know it.: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''{{NOINDEX|visible=yes}}''' | |||
| == Discussion of my editing at Alternative Medicine == | |||
| <br> | |||
| ] | |||
| {{Ct/aware|ap|cc|ps}} | |||
| {{skip to top and bottom}} | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| </div> | |||
| {{Press | |||
| | subject2 = article | |||
| | author2 = Ashe Schow | |||
| | title2 = Misplaced Pages founder advocates for updating policies following 'The Hunting Ground' controversy | |||
| | org2 = '']'' | |||
| | url2 = https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wikipedia-founder-advocates-for-updating-policies-following-the-hunting-ground-controversy | |||
| | date2 = November 25, 2015 | |||
| | quote2 = Another editor, whose username is BullRangifer, suggested Misplaced Pages not become "a kangaroo court or lynching" by rushing to ban accounts who break COI. BullRangifer suggested following seven steps to determine whether "The Hunting Ground" crew member should be banned and whether his edits should be removed. Some of the steps included how he handled questions related to his edits and whether he stuck to discussion pages to ask for edits rather than making them himself. | |||
| | accessdate2 = February 8, 2020 | |||
| | subject3 = article | |||
| | author3 = Marcus Gilmer | |||
| | title3 = Misplaced Pages demotes Breitbart to fake news | |||
| | org3 = ] | |||
| | url3 = https://mashable.com/article/wikipedia-breitbart-ban-fake-news/ | |||
| | date3 = October 3, 2018 | |||
| | quote3 = Support. If anything, it's even more unreliable than the Daily Mail, as they at least use trained journalists, whereas Breitbart is a fringe propaganda organization which lets its extreme partisan bias get in the way of how it reports things, and whether it does so, just as Fox News does. It too should be deprecated, but let's start with Breitbart (and InfoWars). — BullRangifer 17:51, 8 September 2018 (UTC) | |||
| | accessdate3 = October 5, 2018 | |||
| | subject4 = article | |||
| | author4 = Alexander Hall | |||
| | title4 = Report: Misplaced Pages Editors Censoring Evidence Supporting Michael Flynn | |||
| | org4 = ] | |||
| | url4 = https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/techwatch/alexander-hall/2020/08/13/report-wikipedia-editors-censoring-evidence-supporting | |||
| | date4 = August 13, 2020 | |||
| | quote4 = Liberal user Valjean responded by condemning this revelation as 'conspiracy theories' and 'part of a cover-up,' even 'when it comes from the now-sitting government of the USA.' Valjean specified that 'Nothing coming from Trump's Justice Department, FBI, CIA, anything, can be trusted.' Breitbart alleged that Valjean, formerly under the name 'BullRangifer' has been 'previously involved in slanting articles about the Russia investigation.' | |||
| | accessdate4 = August 15, 2020 | |||
| | subject5 = article | |||
| | author5 = Raymond Sturman | |||
| | title5 = Top 5 Editing Conflicts in Misplaced Pages Pages on Religion | |||
| | org5 = World Religion News | |||
| | url5 = https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikipedia/top-5-editing-conflicts-in-wikipedia-pages-on-religion/ | |||
| | date5 = October 23, 2024 | |||
| | quote5 = Located on the Catholic Church Misplaced Pages talk page, the screenshot below details a recent discussion of the tension between the Roman Catholic Church and other branches of Catholicism. Editor 'Valjean' is protesting that the word 'Roman' has been removed from the title, arguing that there are other branches of Catholicism, while the Roman Catholic Church says it is the real Catholic Church. | |||
| | accessdate5 = October 24, 2024 | |||
| }}{{clear}} | |||
| <!-- {{semi-retired|Some may have noticed that my activity level isn't anywhere near what it used to be. Well, being a Misplaced Pages editor is just not that much fun anymore. | |||
| Wikilawyering has become a fine art that's exploited by partisan POV pushers and, predominantly right-wing, paid political whitewashers (the Koch brothers control many articles), and NPOV is pretty much impossible to maintain on such articles. It's not worth the effort (which is more like a battle), so a lot of the time I now avoid such conflict zones. | |||
| Your latest edit to the Alternative medicine page appears to be a copy/paste, and maybe a copyvio. I've reverted it, could you perhaps write up a summary, and reference to the study itstead? ] 16:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Looks much more consistent with the rest of the page now. :-) ] 23:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks! I'm still learning and appreciate the helpful suggestions. Now I need help with the ] section about "Problems with the label "alternative"". It's far too shallow and needs supporting arguments, but AED doesn't seem to think so. -- ] 06:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::Check the talk archives and article history for some of the discussions on the labels used, but let me warn you, the archives and history are *filled* with acrimonious and contentious debates on the labels used (CAM, C/AM, AM, etc.). Some of the old POV warriors may have left, but to drag out an old cliché, "there be monsters there". I guess if nothing else, the history of that article can teach you a lot about the difficult sides of wikipedia. :-) ] 07:59, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I'm not at all surprised...;-) As the Assistant Listmaster for the , I'm used to dealing with this stuff daily, and often feel we are dealing with cultists, rather than people who use rational arguments. There are some who do stick to reason and evidence, but not many. If the subject interests you, you're welcome to join.....;-) -- ] 09:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::If you want to know what I think, please feel free to ask rather than speculate. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, so copying and pasting abstracts or quotes is a lazy, inappropriate way to build an article. By referencing "POV warriors" and "monsters", I'm not sure if ] is referring to me or not, but I'm quite sure an examination of the article and Talk page histories there will show that there are no double standards in my edits. I would suggest paraphrasing the information you would like included with appropriate references. ] 17:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Fixing commas and grammar is pretty uncontroversial. It's a shame that talent, knowledge and experience are wasted. Experienced editors get burned out, and there is not an endless supply of such editors, so Misplaced Pages is bleeding. Until the community does something to rectify this situation, it will lose out on such talent and the editing pool will become more and more dominated by political hacks and amateur jerks.}} --> | |||
| Hi AED, | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| {{Talk header |bottom= |custom_header=Welcome to Valjean's talk page! ]] |wp= |display_title= |arpol= |sc1= |sc2= |sc3= |sc4= |sc5= |demospace= |hide_find_sources= |search_term1= |search_term2= |search-domain= |noarchive= |search= }} | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| {{left|1=]}} | |||
| {{TOC left}} | |||
| {{User:Valjean/Negotiation table}}{{User:Valjean/Graham}} | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| == You see this? == | |||
| As a newcomer here, I appreciate all the help I can get. I can see what you mean about too many quotes, etc. I have a suggested solution. I'm not sure if it's proper to do it, so let me know what you think. | |||
| ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 19:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| How about if I create another page for the quotes and references, and then just leave a link to that page in the article? | |||
| : Yes, we've known that he was accused of lying since Spring, but now he has actually confessed. Nice! Giuliani has some unsavory Russian intelligence accomplices in his efforts to cover-up Trump's misdeeds and cast the blame on others, such as Biden and Ukraine. Nasty business. Our content that says that "no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden has been found" (paraphrase) is still accurate. -- ] (]) (PING me) 19:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| BTW, your sharp mind is needed at ]. -- ] (]) (PING me) 19:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I'll check it out when I have some time. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 20:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| I would also appreciate your help with a creating a sandbox (see below). -- ] 19:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Happy First Edit Day!== | |||
| == Help with creation of "Personal Sandbox" == | |||
| <!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## --> | |||
| While I have you guys "on the line", I'm wondering if it would be possible to create a tab at the top of user pages called "Personal Sandbox"? It should be locked and invisible to others. Each registered user would then have a place to do their own experimenting and screwups, without anyone else interfering, vandalizing, spying, etc. -- ] 19:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="background-color:#E6E6FA; border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em auto; padding: 0.5em; width:90%; text-align: center">]<span style="font-weight:bold;font-size:125%;">Happy First Edit Day!</span>] | |||
| Have a very happy first edit anniversary! | |||
| From the ], ] (]) 00:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == My Sandbox == | |||
| </div> | |||
| == Recent edit which concerns you == | |||
| For the new ] entry: | |||
| Hello, please see the edit summary for {{oldid2|1265841559|this edit}}. ] (]) 23:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Definition == | |||
| *Account has now been blocked for making legal threats. ] (]) 23:30, 28 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| '''Quackbusters''' is a term used in two senses: | |||
| *:Thanks. -- ] (]) (PING me) 02:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == You are wrong and you know it. == | |||
| * 1. As a derogatory term used to denigrate opposers of ]. This use is self-defeating, since it identifies the user as one who opposes those who oppose quackery. | |||
| "Your criticism carries no weight with us as long as you show so much evidence you ." | |||
| :When used in this sense it is an attack, especially of the type known as ]. It's most prominent user operates the ] website. | |||
| "You have been lied to." | |||
| * 2. As a fitting description proudly born by some opposers of quackery, since it clearly identifies their relation to it. | |||
| "Never repeat what you ever again." | |||
| === What it is not === | |||
| The term has no relation to its use here: | |||
| *] | |||
| Now that the shoe is on the other foot "...maybe you should get better sources and new friends." ] (]) 16:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Related links == | |||
| : ? What are you talking about? -- ] (]) (PING me) 17:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| * | |||
| ::Stop harassing me. This is your final warning. ] (]) 18:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| * | |||
| * - website critical of quackbusters, Quackwatch and Dr. Stephen Barrett | |||
| == Clarification on my 4 February 2024 comment == | |||
| Sorry to bring this up again, but when I said "] told me I need to get consensus on the talk page first." (link here: ), I actually meant to say "] told me I need to get consensus on the talk page first.", per this revision: . ] (]) 11:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| : Okay. -- ] (]) (PING me) 16:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:10, 20 January 2025
This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.
Compare Wikipedias How to find word count
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
 | This page has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
| Welcome to Valjean's talk page! TBIP |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 |
"The best content is developed through civil collaboration between editors who hold opposing points of view."
by Valjean. From WP:NEUTRALEDIT
"The quality of Misplaced Pages articles rises with the number of editors per article as well as a greater diversity among them."
When all else fails, AGF and remember that
We Just Disagree
So let's leave it alone, 'cause we can't see eye to eye.
There ain't no good guy, there ain't no bad guy.
There's only you and me, and we just disagree.
by Dave Mason (Listen)
Try to stay in the top three sections of this hierarchy.
You see this?
Andre🚐 19:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, we've known that he was accused of lying since Spring, but now he has actually confessed. Nice! Giuliani has some unsavory Russian intelligence accomplices in his efforts to cover-up Trump's misdeeds and cast the blame on others, such as Biden and Ukraine. Nasty business. Our content that says that "no evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden has been found" (paraphrase) is still accurate. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
BTW, your sharp mind is needed at Talk:E._Jean_Carroll_v._Donald_J._Trump#"Falsely_stated"??. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'll check it out when I have some time. Andre🚐 20:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Recent edit which concerns you
Hello, please see the edit summary for this edit. Johnj1995 (talk) 23:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
- Account has now been blocked for making legal threats. Johnj1995 (talk) 23:30, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
You are wrong and you know it.
"Your criticism carries no weight with us as long as you show so much evidence you ."
"You have been lied to."
"Never repeat what you ever again."
Now that the shoe is on the other foot "...maybe you should get better sources and new friends." Chompaydm (talk) 16:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- ? What are you talking about? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Stop harassing me. This is your final warning. Chompaydm (talk) 18:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Clarification on my 4 February 2024 comment
Sorry to bring this up again, but when I said "User:Valjean told me I need to get consensus on the talk page first." (link here: ), I actually meant to say "User:GiantSnowman told me I need to get consensus on the talk page first.", per this revision: . 123957a (talk) 11:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Okay. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)