Misplaced Pages

User talk:Seb az86556

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Humanpublic (talk | contribs) at 20:46, 24 February 2013 (edit warring and hounding: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 20:46, 24 February 2013 by Humanpublic (talk | contribs) (edit warring and hounding: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
earlier on this program...
(archives)
(+)

2009

15255    july 2009
49597    august 2009
12718    september 2009
6884    october 2009
20650    november 2009
27742    december 2009

2010

38848    january 2010
31594    february 2010
18754    march 2010
14511    april 2010
18480    may 2010
9998    june 2010
13864    july 2010
17597    august 2010
6479    september 2010
12322    october 2010
22341    november 2010
6914    december 2010

2011

27363    january 2011
15692    february 2011
16618    march 2011
12744    april 2011
9267    may 2011
5866    june 2011
13911    july 2011
4768    august 2011
4600    september 2011
5340    october 2011
13038    november 2011
15661    december 2011

2012

5527    january 2012
6684    february 2012
6179    march 2012
7290    april 2012
8723    may 2012
10438    june 2012
5929    july 2012
7638    august 2012
14328    september 2012
16008    october 2012
9891    november 2012
1822    december 2012

2013

12285    january 2013
8185    february 2013
18650    march 2013
6264    april 2013
Editing of this talk page by unregistered users is not allowed because choosing to edit without logging into an account creates a power imbalance in communication. All such edits will be reverted without comment.

Unless you have a static IP, you are purposely preventing other editors from observing patterns in your editing behavior as well as purposely choosing not to have a permanent place where other editors may reliably communicate with you about those behaviors. If you are allowed to make this choice, then I choose to rectify this imbalance by ignoring you.

If you truly wish to communicate as equals, please create an account and become an established editor. Thank you.

Carmenelectra

I'm not going to template a regular, but that's 4 reverts so far (and yes, I've contacted the other editor too) ... Black Kite (talk) 16:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I deem removing a maintenance template vandalism (why else would there even be a template for that?). Your opinion? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 17:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Indeed - though I'm not quite sure why that particular template, though? Can you explain a bit further? Black Kite (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Do you think that picture was on the page if wikipedia wasn't dominated by teenage males? In any case, I've taken the thing off my watchlist. It's one of the dumbest things I've seen here lately, but if "the community" wants it that way, it speaks for all of you. It's on the record that I am not part of this. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 17:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I agree with you about the picture, and I see your point now. Black Kite (talk) 18:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

NPA

Insanity? Obviously you've got some reading to do as you seem to have the same misunderstanding that HiLo48 has. Toddst1 (talk) 03:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Acknowledged. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 04:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

complaint

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Censorship_by_archiving — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanpublic (talkcontribs) 17:57, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: your comments at Talk:Genesis creation narrative

This edit of yours has got me thinking. I'm having trouble clarifying my ideas though, so maybe you can help. It seems to me that NPOV requires us to represent all significant views. Since most reliable sources, especially academic sources, are written from a secular viewpoint, we should usually follow their lead. However, in areas where there is a substantial non-secular viewpoint, e.g. religion, we should not discriminate or make judgments as to whether the secular or non-secular viewpoint is correct. We should endeavor to explain both sides without taking sides. This is why we should not treat all religions alike: some have lots of reliable sources supporting their claims to truth, others do not. Does that make any sense? --Cerebellum (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

It does. My response was to the definition of "secular", e.g. "non-religious"; quite a few people confuse it with "atheist" or "anti-religion" which is incorrect.
In general, I am not too interested in that discussion anymore since it just goes around in circles, and I've come to the conclusion that this is a case of systematic bias which remains unsolvable in the near future. Your last sentence describes exactly that. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 18:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that is exactly what I was confusing it with, thank you for clarifying. I agree that this discussion seems pretty intractable - hopefully we can find some kind of compromise eventually :) --Cerebellum (talk) 19:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

RFPP

Thanks for catching the duplication- I missed the earlier request when I looked at the list.Tvoz/talk 07:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Jesus,Argument from silence".

Guide for participants

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:
  • It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.
What this noticeboard is not:
  • It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
  • It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
  • It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
  • It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.
Things to remember:
  • Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
  • Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
  • Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~".
  • If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot  16:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring

Thank you for the notice. Yes, there is a current dispute with User:Bhaskarbhagawati (BB), and I am trying to resolve the matter. Discussions are not helping, and I shall take it to the dispute resolution forum soon. Chaipau (talk) 11:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I just noticed you don't even know what's going on: He brought it up at ANI... w/o notifying you... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 11:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, will cautious next time. भास्कर्bhagawati Speak 12:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

edit warring and hounding

Please don't revert controversial edits without explanation. Also, for the second time, please don't go to articles just because I am editing them, especially not if all you're going to do is revert me. Humanpublic (talk) 20:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)