| Revision as of 14:40, 12 August 2009 view sourceMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 1d) to User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 49.← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:58, 12 August 2009 view source ArnoldHash (talk | contribs)9 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This is to say hello to a fellow Wikipedian ] (]) 19:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)) | |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This is to say hello to a fellow Wikipedian ] (]) 19:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)) | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| ==Pedophilia/Censorship== | |||
| Please, Jimmy, wait. Just, like, don't delete this right away. This is ''so'' a legitimate question. To what extent is Misplaced Pages censored? I mean, fine: I'll ask one question: Are pedophiles allowed here at all? I mean, if pages like: ] and ] are allowed, why shouldn't they? It's natural, and it's happening in the world even today. I mean, come on, don't just give me crap (pardon the language, if that somehow violates "civility" on Misplaced Pages) about Misplaced Pages policies. You're a big part of modern society; respect that and learn from it. You're seriously gonna swear that none of the editors, maybe even sysops, aren't pedophiles? My point is this: If we don't care about it at all, why are some articles marked freaking "controversial", then? It's almost laughable. Some users, it's almost positive they're pedophiles, but say one word to them about it, and you're, like, banned forever; like, who contributes to an article about raping little girls or sacrificing children as Satanists? Well, heck, as long as it's constructive editing, in some people's eyes... But no one effing cares. Cute. Wales, look, I don't want to give you trouble, but this is just tiring me, seriously. Misplaced Pages's awesome, but, like...See, like, Child Pornography was nominated for deletion a few months ago, give or take, but, listen, the nominator was banned and the deletion template was removed before anyone could give evaluation. But I'm cool with that; none of my business. But, Jimmy, look at ]]. I mean, an old man with two dogs and who deletes the Deletion Nomination Tag on Child Pornography, like, right after it was posted...Well, I don't know what to say; please don't get mad. I won't talk to you at all after this if you don't want me to. Just give one comment, one response. Even telling me to f*** off and that you don't care could be fine; it is your own personal, honest opinion, after all. Bye, Jimbo. Please, I wouldn't be here wasting ''my'' time and yours if I really didn't think it important; there '''are''' Anti-Pedophilia agencies, you know. I just don't understand...are you sure your policies about Censorship are unflawed? Because, I personally don't know. Please, just enlighten me. Best wishes, Jim, ] (]) 15:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:58, 12 August 2009
 | Jimbo Wales is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon. |
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
Featured picture notification
 |
- Heh, Congrats Jimmy ;). I remember when I uploaded the original from the Foundation website to commons, and it almost got deleted because we couldn't find evidence of you releasing it under cc-by-sa ;). Its still a great photo though and I'm glad to see it made FP :). Mifter (talk) 04:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
New revenue stream?
It's a long-shot, but forewarned is forearmed. An idle thought crossed my mind that AIs being tested on Misplaced Pages could harm the project, so I proposed this policy Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)#Artificial Intelligence User Accounts. There is some uncertainty about the seriousness of the motivation, but looking at it objectively, it does make some sense. Even if it at first sounds off the wall. Cheers HarryAlffa (talk) 18:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
arbcom notice
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Javert, Rjd0060, and Jimbo and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,
nb: I'm just posting this here because Drew seems banned from this page ;) See diff diff. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oh dear...
- This is priceless; see, it wasn't "Drew" — someone else did it. See User talk:Javert#ARBCOM, too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Précis
- The arbcom case is gone. Drew's blocked, for a week at the moment, but an indef is quite possible once all the cards are face up on the same table. Most of the discussion is on User talk:Drew R. Smith. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Today's WP:RESTATEMENT OF THE OBVIOUS
"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." — George Orwell
Today's WP:RESTATEMENT OF THE OBVIOUS is brought to you by The International Euphemism Institute. Nasty-twentieth-century-political-philosophy-guilt-by-association update: The article about the recently-coined political epithet Israeli apartheid became Israel and the apartheid analogy because .... mumble mumble mumble. The article about the recently-coined political epithet Islamofascism, however, must remain under the title Islamofascism because ... well, these matters are controversial, and discussion of them is best left to the experts.
BYT (talk) 12:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Here's my day job. Here's my total edit count, now approaching 7,000.
- Other than the fact that you know what electricity is, and that you're not familiar with "signing" your posts - may I ask what your point is? — Ched : ? 12:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
hi, happy birthday
|
The Hello Barnstar | |
| This is to say hello to a fellow Wikipedian User F203 (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)) |
Pedophilia/Censorship
Please, Jimmy, wait. Just, like, don't delete this right away. This is so a legitimate question. To what extent is Misplaced Pages censored? I mean, fine: I'll ask one question: Are pedophiles allowed here at all? I mean, if pages like: Child pornography and List of films portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors are allowed, why shouldn't they? It's natural, and it's happening in the world even today. I mean, come on, don't just give me crap (pardon the language, if that somehow violates "civility" on Misplaced Pages) about Misplaced Pages policies. You're a big part of modern society; respect that and learn from it. You're seriously gonna swear that none of the editors, maybe even sysops, aren't pedophiles? My point is this: If we don't care about it at all, why are some articles marked freaking "controversial", then? It's almost laughable. Some users, it's almost positive they're pedophiles, but say one word to them about it, and you're, like, banned forever; like, who contributes to an article about raping little girls or sacrificing children as Satanists? Well, heck, as long as it's constructive editing, in some people's eyes... But no one effing cares. Cute. Wales, look, I don't want to give you trouble, but this is just tiring me, seriously. Misplaced Pages's awesome, but, like...See, like, Child Pornography was nominated for deletion a few months ago, give or take, but, listen, the nominator was banned and the deletion template was removed before anyone could give evaluation. But I'm cool with that; none of my business. But, Jimmy, look at User:Squeakbox]. I mean, an old man with two dogs and who deletes the Deletion Nomination Tag on Child Pornography, like, right after it was posted...Well, I don't know what to say; please don't get mad. I won't talk to you at all after this if you don't want me to. Just give one comment, one response. Even telling me to f*** off and that you don't care could be fine; it is your own personal, honest opinion, after all. Bye, Jimbo. Please, I wouldn't be here wasting my time and yours if I really didn't think it important; there are Anti-Pedophilia agencies, you know. I just don't understand...are you sure your policies about Censorship are unflawed? Because, I personally don't know. Please, just enlighten me. Best wishes, Jim, ArnoldHash (talk) 15:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)