User talk:The shaman poet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, The shaman poet, and welcome to Wikipedia! 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 Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Vsmith (talk) 10:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing[edit]

Please provide reliable sources to support your edits. Also, please read original research. Vsmith (talk) 22:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm Katieh5584. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Magnisiocummingtonite, with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, I restored the page's content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Katieh5584 (talk) 16:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Bismuth with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Eyesnore (pc) 16:10, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio[edit]

Stop icon Your addition to Epidote has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Vsmith (talk) 19:36, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Agpaitic rock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Na (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Fuchsite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Verdite
Galaxite (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Isometric
Galena (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Isometric

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Graphite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cubic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Vsmith (talk) 20:46, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=I am being unfairly blocked for protesting in defense of having helpful complied contributions made being deleted by an individual with lack of reasoning. I believe this case should be examined by an unbiased party and the editor V. Smith reviewed for his unjust and haste reaction without providing an explanation first.}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Black Kite kite (talk) 20:57, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
No, you're not blocked for "protesting in defense" of something. You have been blocked for making personal attacks. It's not acceptable to call people morons and fools. Please read the links above. HandsomeFella (talk) 21:24, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Unless you're claiming to have multiple personalities, please leave this matter to the 'committee'. Your personal assessments or preconceived notions are of no interest to me. As you see, I have a right to act defensively. I don't appreciate being subjected to ignorant minds.

... further ignorance will only lead me to call it as I see it.The shaman poet (talk) 00:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome?... really?[edit]

I've been here for relatively a short while. I was inspired to join the wiki editors due to the numerous inaccurate imported info I saw, copy pasted from sources with errors. It seemed like analyzing the borrowed info had slipped past people! While at it, I made useful contributions as well; to the extent that I can easily provide support, either by direct reasoning or referencing the introduced material to the best of my ability.

However, from the start, a particular editor named Vsmith, albeit occasionally supportive in adding minor info, tends to delete far more than making actual contributions. Often the reasonings provided indicate a lack of focus. For example, recently, Vsmith claims that comparisons made between diamond and graphite on graphite page are "pointless and unsourced". Yet it doesn't take an "advanced degree in geology" as boasted to recognize the plain fact that making comparisons don't require referencing! Logical assessments do not require a source or sourcing. Only facts regarding the subjects being compared need to be referenced, as the info was referenced with relevant links.

Yet before discussing the issue, and so inconsiderate of the time I spent to compile the material, my efforts were wiped away labeled "pointless". Thus, every time anyone across the world wishes to compare and contrast graphite and diamonds side by side on a page, remember that the foremost authority on this matter named Vsmith (a Wiki editor- sort of) claims that you are making a "pointless comparison".

As a result of a blunt protest on the graphite talk page, I am currently blocked from further editings.

..and this is far too much more energy than I expected to spend in reaction to distraction by another editor.

Does "Wikipidia" want editors that make fortifying contributions to pages? Or would Wiki benefit more from editors who make pages look pretty after others, but delete time spent helful info with a click before using the "Talk" page first regarding their concern?

Without a sufficient answer, I don't find the need to return.

Wikipedia needs editors that can work collaboratively with other editors. When you call other editors "complete morons", and attack them for "ignorance", you're showing an unwillingness to collaborate with other editors. You don't have to agree with an editor, you can call their opinions into question, you can combat their assertions with assertions of your own (preferably backed up by evidence verified by reliable sources). What you can't do is attack someone personally. You must be willing to work with other people that you think may be "morons", without escalating discussions by making such accusations.
Look at it this way. Someone comes to an article and makes an obviously incorrect action. You undo their action. They start an argument on the discussion page to defend their action. If they don't know what they are doing, and you are better-informed, you should have no difficultly either (A) convincing that person that they are wrong, or (B) convincing other people that the person is wrong. In either case, such convincing (which helps you establish a consensus) is done via a process we call dispute resolution. Sometimes it's easy and quick, where someone is willing to accept an obviously stronger argument backed up by evidence. Sometimes it can be dragged out because someone is stubborn. And sometimes you will be wrong. But that's how Wikipedia works. At no point is it necessary to attack someone personally, and it is never helpful to try to label a person as unintelligent. If you feel that you have to resort to such language to succeed in a debate then you've already lost, ad hominem attacks are usually the last, desperate act of someone who has either lost confidence in their position, or knows that they are wrong but refuses to "lose" despite that.
Sometimes, with care, you can label someone as incompetent, but that is reserved for individuals that completely lack the ability to participate at Wikipedia. A person who either cannot understand Wikipedia's processes well enough to ever contribute constructively, or a person whose language skills are too poor to be understood (this is the English project, there are projects for other languages), that kind of person is sometimes labeled as incompetent. But those are extreme situations and don't apply to people who are simply mistaken or have a different opinion from yourself.
I hope you take this to heart and understand why you were blocked. If you have a desire to improve the encyclopedia then when your block expires, take more care to criticize ideas and actions without needing to label people themselves negatively. Remember that if you're right, you should be able to convince others that you are right without denigrating them. -- Atama 17:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

The spirit in which you respond is well, but you are disregarding the possibility that I may already be aware of this. I am not on wiki to compete with anyone. Thus the assertion that the accurate ad hominems used were due to failure to win an argument is ridiculous. Fact is, my personal contribution was not in dispute. It was merely labeled "pointless" by a supervising editor with delusions of grandeur. It was not done due to incompetency so much as due to ignorance. In Nature, for every action, an opposite reaction can be expected. The shaman poet (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2014 (UTC)