User talk:Shearonink

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Messages left on my talkpage sometimes won't get as quick a response as they should. And if there's something I promised to do on-Wiki and it hasn't gotten done?...I apologize in advance.
Let's make a pact, you and me...don't make assumptions about me and I won't make assumptions about you.
I try to think the best about try to think the best about me, OK?!?
Assuming good reasons for our fellow Wikipedia editors' behavior should be the first thing we do BEFORE we reach for the keyboard...
Stating that "Our social policies are not a suicide pact" is not really a decent excuse for any Wikipedian's poor behavior.
And I really hate it when good editors feel they have to leave...I mean, I can understand retiring, but I miss so many people who aren't around any more for one reason or another.
Sometimes?...sometimes I adopt really crappy orphan articles and when others come along and change and/or improve my efforts,
I know I don't "own" the article and I don't edit war about it but it sometimes just breaks my heart.
So today I came across an editor who has had at least 4 different names, had sockpuppet notices posted on their account, been blocked and/or banned at least once, and now is editing again. I'm sure there are good reasons for all various past accounts, the recent renamings, etc., etc., but sometimes I see things that happen around here and try to tease out the sequence of events and eventually just go "Wtf." Yeah, I'm thinking that right now about the simmering war against infoboxes...
True Confession: I haven't been in the #wikipedia-en-help channel since VE was rolled-out...I have 15000+ edits and was a regular there but I don't feel competent to help new users edit on a system I don't understand. At all. And one I really do not want to learn. At all. Is it somehow "wrong" that I really love editing in wikitext? I am not a coder, I am not a computer-person. I do not understand Linux or Flow or liquid threads or almost any aspect of the technical side of Wikipedia...all I know Is that I love words. I love being part of this project. I love making knowledge accessible to people. So I taught myself by cutting & pasting the code from articles and from Wiki-gimmicks that I liked, from pestering people who knew their way around (especially User:Chzz). The high I got from mastering the language and learning how to make things look right?... PRICELESS.
Shearonink (talk)
IP-editors can visit my alt-talk page and leave a message by clicking -->HERE<--'.

Welcome and introduction[edit]

Hi, Shearonink. This is NOT some automated's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  22:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

  • You don't need to read anything - anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people.
  • Ask for help. Talk to us live, or edit this page, put {{helpme}} and describe what help you need. Someone will reply very quickly - usually within a few minutes.
  • Edit existing articles, before you make your own. Look at some subjects that you know about, and see if you can make them a bit better. For example, Wikipedia:Cleanup#2009.
  • When you're ready, read about Your first article. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references.

Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page.

There's lots of information below. Once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia!

-- Chzz  ►  22:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Getting started
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles

A nice cup of...[edit]

Q This user has access to Questia through The Wikipedia Library
522 pending submissions This user is a participant in WikiProject Articles for creation. You can help!
H This user has access to HighBeam through The Wikipedia Library


Think before you post. Ok?...

Oh and ummmm...newer posts go at the bottom of the page. It's easy, just use the New Section tab up at the top.

This is the last edit I ever do; a note of forgiveness[edit]

I'm sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 19:53, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Sunday March 22: Wikipedia Day NYC Celebration and Mini-Conference[edit]

Sunday March 22: Wikipedia Day NYC 2015
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg
2014 Barnard College Barnard Hall entrance facade.jpg

You are invited to join us at Barnard College for Wikipedia Day NYC 2015, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference for the project's 14th birthday. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory unconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

10:00pm - 9:00 pm at Barnard College, 3009 Broadway, by W 118th St

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 21:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

UVA name list thing[edit]

I don't think you've understood what I've been trying to say about listing Jackie's friend's names. I think your change was a step in the right direction, but not the point. Look at this:

The two friends confirmed to the Post that they remembered meeting "Jackie" on the night of the incident, that she was distraught but not visibly injured or bloodied, and that details she provided then were different from those in the Rolling Stone article. One friend, Ryan Duffin (called "Randall" in the Rolling Stone article), told the Washington Post that he had never spoken to any reporter from Rolling Stone, despite the fact that Erdely had claimed him as a source to corroborate the accuser's story. [36] [27][37]

What I'm trying to say is that's how you should identify Jackie's friends. If you want to identify the other two, it should look like that: They're quoted or otherwise referenced by name and identified by alias in an RS. Are there facts worthy of inclusion for the other two similar to the above? If so, identify them the same way that Randall is identified above. If not, don't identify them. I'm not trying to stop you putting their names in. I figure that if you really want to, you can find passages in the RSs that justify identifying the other two. I'm just saying they should be identified iff such facts are added. Dingsuntil (talk) 04:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Guess what, I do understand what you've been saying. You don't like lists! You want the information to be integrated into the Wikipedia article! And, guess what? I *agree* with you. Look, I think it's important, These people stepped up and publicly identified themselves as the people at the heart of a huge media controversy. If they are willing to identify themselves their names shouldn't be left out of the Wikipedia article that reports on this event and its aftermath. These people are part of the story now, what their pseudonymous stand-ins are asserted to have done is part of it too, but the *people* should be given their personhood and allowed to have their part in this narrative. Crafting a Wikipedia article so this will all make timeline/linear sense will take some time, that's all. Shearonink (talk) 06:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Fair enough. Dingsuntil (talk) 00:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)