Misplaced Pages

User talk:Kikodawgzzz: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:25, 22 December 2009 editMalik Shabazz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers106,163 edits White privilege: reply← Previous edit Revision as of 21:32, 22 December 2009 edit undoMalik Shabazz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers106,163 edits Abuse of speedy deletion: new sectionNext edit →
Line 42: Line 42:
::::::::Name-calling doesn't help your argument at all. I don't give a damn whether you're a communist or a fascist, I'm just telling you that your diatribe doesn't belong on the article. Misplaced Pages has standardized templates, such as {{tl|Disputed}}, and editors don't write their own complaints on top of encyclopedia articles. ::::::::Name-calling doesn't help your argument at all. I don't give a damn whether you're a communist or a fascist, I'm just telling you that your diatribe doesn't belong on the article. Misplaced Pages has standardized templates, such as {{tl|Disputed}}, and editors don't write their own complaints on top of encyclopedia articles.
::::::::If you don't want to add the balance you think is sorely lacking from the article, who do think will do it? Santa's elves? I'm not "shut out opposing views", I'm advising you to face Misplaced Pages's reality—if you want something done, do it yourself. —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 21:25, 22 December 2009 (UTC) ::::::::If you don't want to add the balance you think is sorely lacking from the article, who do think will do it? Santa's elves? I'm not "shut out opposing views", I'm advising you to face Misplaced Pages's reality—if you want something done, do it yourself. —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 21:25, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

== Abuse of ] ==

This is the third time you've nominated ] for speedy deletion. Have you bothered to read ]? Which one of the reasons listed there does the article satisfy? (Hint: none.) —&nbsp;]&nbsp;<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 21:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:32, 22 December 2009

Welcome!

Hello, Kikodawgzzz, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- The Red Pen of Doom 03:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Fourth International, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 08:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi, Kikodawgzzz -- I've noticed you generally mark pretty much all of your edits as minor. I looked at a few, and they all seem to be constructive and productive. But a minor edit "signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions: typographical corrections, formatting and presentational changes, rearrangement of text without modification of content, etc." So adding information or reverting previous deletions is not generally a minor edit.

Just a heads up, thanks for your time & contributions. --Glenfarclas (talk) 01:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not so sure I agree with that assessment, Glen, especially considering the edits I've done under this username in no way represent the edits I've done since I started being a regular on the site in about 2005. I've edited under several logged IP addresses (most of which I no longer remember, so I can't list them here, and they've all been different computers and/or connections over the years so blah to all that) as well as other usernames I lost the passwords for. So although I appreciate you bringing the matter to my attention, I find it basically unwarranted given that my history is much more extensive than the username would lead you to believe.\

And in that same vein, I assure you I need not be thanked for my contributions. I've been contributing, lurker and not, for quite a few years now! But I appreciate the sentiment; I just don't wanna be taken as a 'newbie'.Kikodawgzzz (talk) 23:15, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries -- I tried to take a neutral and respectful tone since I obviously don't know you, so I hope I didn't cause any offense. And I know you don't "need" thanks, but I give my appreciation freely where merited. :) --Glenfarclas (talk) 05:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

December 2009

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Special Period. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.--Auric (talk) 17:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Auric: Sorry about that; I don't think I'd actually meant to full-on delete the text from those sections, although as you'll see, I have tagged them again as NPOV using tags, and I have followed-up by starting a new thread on the article's Talk page. I'm the article's original creator, so it disheartened me to see these new contentious sections on it — it's certainly not anything I would have added, and now I'm fighting to have it amended or taken off. The argument that Cuba is a 'repressive state' instituting 'repressive measures' of various kinds is a debatable viewpoint, not objective fact, but it does appear as though those for whom that viewpoint is reality insist on using every opportunity, including the Special Period, to voice it. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 00:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

White privilege

Please stop adding your disclaimer to the top of the article. See Misplaced Pages:No disclaimers in articles. If you add it again, you will be blocked. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 18:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Shabazz, you are not the boss of this article. Misplaced Pages is free to be edited by anyone, including people you don't agree with. I will not be threatened. And yes I will re-add the disclaimer Kikodawgzzz (talk) 20:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Did you read the guideline. Misplaced Pages doesn't use disclaimers. Get over yourself already. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 21:02, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
It's just an expansion of "neutrality disputed". and the only arguments i've heard in support of white skin privilege are nationalist ones that use an emotional "racism" cover to forbid criticism of this THEORY. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
No, it's not an "expansion" of anything; it's your own little diatribe. If you don't like the tone of the article, fix it. Otherwise, stop complaining. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 21:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
So you believe that the only people who can criticise are the people who can do it themselves? Frankly, as I said in my original recent-comments, the article has so vastly changed since the early days I was working on it that it's now impossible for me to balance it myself. But I am not taking on the responsibility of gathering a leftist anti-white-privilege-theory 'posse' to go in and balance it. Hopefully others who are already following the article can. But if you believe the only people who can complain are the ones who can take it upon themselves to fix it, then that's just another way to shut out opposing views. Nationalists don't like communists, and you, as a nationalist (as Marie also is), just don't want us around, that's all. You want the article to yourself. Too bad. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 21:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Name-calling doesn't help your argument at all. I don't give a damn whether you're a communist or a fascist, I'm just telling you that your diatribe doesn't belong on the article. Misplaced Pages has standardized templates, such as {{Disputed}}, and editors don't write their own complaints on top of encyclopedia articles.
If you don't want to add the balance you think is sorely lacking from the article, who do think will do it? Santa's elves? I'm not "shut out opposing views", I'm advising you to face Misplaced Pages's reality—if you want something done, do it yourself. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 21:25, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Abuse of speedy deletion

This is the third time you've nominated White privilege for speedy deletion. Have you bothered to read the criteria for speedy deletion? Which one of the reasons listed there does the article satisfy? (Hint: none.) — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 21:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)