| Revision as of 22:54, 25 June 2014 editTimtrent (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers132,545 editsm →June 2014 - re your comments: odd typos← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:57, 25 June 2014 edit undoMatthewhburch (talk | contribs)539 edits →June 2014 - re your commentsNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| :I have, throughout this, answered your questions with civility and with correctness. I dislike your behaviour. I respect your integrity. I do not want to know you as a person. Were you my employee I would dismiss you at once for the behaviours you have exhibited here if exhibited to another person. Since they are exhibited to me I can tell you that they are offensive. I would remind you that this web site is in the public domain. Anything we do or say here is not discarded, nor forgotten. Google is not your friend. ] ] 22:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC) | :I have, throughout this, answered your questions with civility and with correctness. I dislike your behaviour. I respect your integrity. I do not want to know you as a person. Were you my employee I would dismiss you at once for the behaviours you have exhibited here if exhibited to another person. Since they are exhibited to me I can tell you that they are offensive. I would remind you that this web site is in the public domain. Anything we do or say here is not discarded, nor forgotten. Google is not your friend. ] ] 22:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
| I have removed comments that can be construed as an attack, and made it clear that his answer had no meaning. I have not yet received a meaningful answer, and what is written above your comment here comes from an untrustworthy source with a history of vagueness. | |||
Revision as of 22:57, 25 June 2014
Welcome!
Good Day, feel free to say what you wish, but keep it civil.
Please do not top-load the talk page. Put your comments at the bottom, so I'll know what order they occur in, at a glance.
Matthewhburch (talk) 23:57, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
There is nothing to prevent your creating the material as an article
As you have been made aware, your account is allowed to create main namespace articles. You do not have to go through the WP:AFC process. There are pros and cons.
Pro:
- You will be able to create the article you wish, with the material you wish, unhindered by a review process, especially one you do not understand or believe in.
- You will have more eyes on the article than simply the group of self appointed volunteers who review articles at present
Con:
- You have created a Streisand effect about material you submit, and will have more eyes on the article and any contributions you make than is usual
- Because of this, it is likely that you will attract a more pedantic level of scrutiny of the articles you create than most other editors. Thsi often leads to an article being nominated at WP:AFD
- Whereas the WP:MFD process simply deletes the draft and will probably delete this one, the WP:AFD process also has a bar, if the article is deleted, against subsequent re-creation
Whether you like it or not,[REDACTED] is run by the editors, including you, for the benefit of WIkipedia. This is what the project is all about. You may be able to influence its direction, but it is likely only to be by the smallest part of a degree. Many good people have tried and almost no-one has had much effect. The Wisdom of Crowds is not always wise. It is, however, the thing we who edit here have chosen to submit to. Fiddle Faddle 20:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
June 2014 - re your comments
Please do not attack other editors, as you did on Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Propulsion methods utilizing fuel accelerated from a remote fuel source. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. It is particularly unnecessary when the targets of your abuse have gone out of their way to give you lengthy advice. Sionk (talk) 22:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
- To be clear, Matthew Burch, I find your comment abusive and wholly objectionable, yet entirely unsurprising. You have adopted a bullying and hectoring tone throughout, and it appears to be because you have not been getting your way. You will note that I have not referred to you, only to your behaviour. What you may not understand is that the warning that Sionk has given you is part of the set of rules which most definitely will get you blocked for a period form editing here.
- I have, throughout this, answered your questions with civility and with correctness. I dislike your behaviour. I respect your integrity. I do not want to know you as a person. Were you my employee I would dismiss you at once for the behaviours you have exhibited here if exhibited to another person. Since they are exhibited to me I can tell you that they are offensive. I would remind you that this web site is in the public domain. Anything we do or say here is not discarded, nor forgotten. Google is not your friend. Fiddle Faddle 22:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
I have removed comments that can be construed as an attack, and made it clear that his answer had no meaning. I have not yet received a meaningful answer, and what is written above your comment here comes from an untrustworthy source with a history of vagueness.