User talk:Thomas.W: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:55, 27 March 2016

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 9 as User talk:Thomas.W/Archive 8 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

THIS USER IS ACTIVE ONLY NOW AND THEN ON WIKIPEDIA, SO REPLIES TO POSTS HERE MIGHT TAKE SEVERAL DAYS, AND EVEN WEEKS.
Please add new discussions at the BOTTOM of the page. Older discussions have been moved to my talk page archive.

Precious again

chasing vandals
Thank you, Thomas, proud for a good reason, for spending most of your "time on WP chasing vandals and socks", for fighting vandalism and misconceptions, for precision in language and linguistic, imagine polychoral praise: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 896th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time flies, Gerda <sigh>. Or maybe it's just me getting slower and slower... Thomas.W ^talk 14:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Extended content

	The Civility Barnstar
	Thanks for your patience with my erroneous response at AN/I today. You could've snapped at me for completely misunderstanding Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources, but you didn't do so. It's much appreciated. Hallward's Ghost ^(Kevin) ^{(My talkpage)} 22:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your expansion of Super 8 film. Drmies (talk) 18:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For watching my user page while I enjoy the weekend. 117Avenue (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Because some things are tedious, and tea invigorates and soothes. (You know of what I speak, I'm sure.) bonadea contributions talk 21:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do, and I will have a cup of tea. Cheers, Tom Thomas.W ^talk 21:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reduced presence on Wikipedia

For multiple reasons, ranging from health issues to beginning to lose faith in the project, after seeing too much of the negative sides of it for too long, and battling aggressive POV-pushers, PR-people, spammers and what have you too many times, I have decided to reduce my presence on Wikipedia even more than I already have. Trying to fight POV-pushers, PR-people and spammers in a fight that can't be won as long as registration isn't required for editing, and confirmation through a valid email address isn't required for registering an account, has made me see my "work" here as just a waste of time and energy, so for the foreseeable future I will be just a reader of Wikipedia, apart from some minor uncontroversial gnoming on articles that interest me. Thomas.W ^talk 10:30, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear that, but I do understand what you mean. A break can be a good thing - I hope you can find renewed inspiration for the project, because it needs people like you. --bonadea contributions talk 14:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W It's quite odd that you claim, above, to be "battling aggressive POV-pushers". On the article "Terry Bean", you are clearly ASSISTING "aggressive POV-pushers". You are threatening immediately to block editors who simply remove biased, contentious, libelous material. Maybe your position depends entirely on the POV? And maybe your POV is somehow related to the "health issues" you mention above? Hint: People like Terry Bean furiously engaged is a lot of health-issue-spreading over the last 40 years. Perhaps you got caught up as well? 67.5.192.83 (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. I'm not "assisting POV-pushers", I'm reverting edits by a POV-pusher, you (in your multiple incarnations, repeatedly editing Terry Bean as [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], and possibly more as I didn't look very far back, all of the IPs geolocating to Portland, Oregon...), first adding unsourced content regarding alleged sex abuse and then repeatedly removing sourced content about it, in an attempt to portray him in as negative a way as possible. Thomas.W ^talk 19:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your reference to "first adding unsourced content regarding alleged sex abuse" interests me, in part because you did not provide any examples of it in diffs. (despite having cited diffs prior to that, and of those merely claiming that there was "repeatedly editing". Apparently your only objection to the edits you actually listed was that they were negative to Bean; you don't show examples of "adding unsourced content.") Let's discuss this "unsourced content": Question, if somebody tries to make an edit, and while he is preparing the citation the edit is reverted by someone else, does that constitute "adding unsourced content"? Another question: have you looked to see if anything negative about Bean, which was properly sourced, was removed with the (false) claim that it was not properly sourced? You should be willing to admit that your allies (confederates; people of similar POV) are misbehaving. Also, you don't seem to realize that when you accused me of an "attempt to portray [Bean] it as negative a way as possible", that is an unjustifiable accusation: The issue isn't supposed to be whether Bean is portrayed as a child-molester, it is whether the material is verifiable and is cited from reliable sources. If reliable sources say that Bean engaged in child-rape, then neither you nor any other person has a valid objection if that source is cited. Your (and others') mere desire to make Bean look better than that doesn't justify cleaning up the article to remove negative material. Also, notice that the people who want to make Bean look better virtually never use the Talk Page; if they are unwilling to justify their actions on the Talk Page, they should be presumed to be acting improperly. 67.5.192.83 (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About the second Official website

Have you tried searching via Internet Archive Wayback Machine? I disagree with you on this matter, but that being said, there is never anything wrong with researching. If you know the url, give it a shot. Devilmanozzy (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments at Laura Brannigan

In an effort to keep the conversation sensible, I've had to impose really strict rules. I'm sorry that I had to delete your second post in the thread, but as you will understand, I have to be seen to be fair. I'll repost your comment in a new section. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 21:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 :Thomas.W   It's quite odd that you claim, above, to be "battling aggressive POV-pushers".  On the article "Terry Bean", you are clearly ASSISTING "aggressive POV-pushers". You are threatening immediately to block editors who simply remove biased, contentious, libelous material.   Maybe your position depends entirely on the POV?  And maybe your POV is somehow related to the "health issues" you mention above?  Hint:  People like Terry Bean furiously engaged is a lot of health-issue-spreading over the last 40 years.  Perhaps you got caught up as well?  [[Special:Contributions/67.5.192.83|67.5.192.83]] ([[User talk:67.5.192.83|talk]]) 19:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 ::No. I'm not "assisting POV-pushers", I'm reverting edits by a POV-pusher, '''you''' (in your multiple incarnations, repeatedly editing [[Terry Bean]] as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Lurie2], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/67.5.220.142], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/67.5.247.215], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/67.5.218.123], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/67.5.192.83], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/174.25.63.115], and possibly more as I didn't look very far back, all of the IPs geolocating to Portland, Oregon...), first adding unsourced content regarding alleged sex abuse and then repeatedly removing sourced content about it, in an attempt to portray him in as negative a way as possible. [[User:Thomas.W|'''Thomas.W''']] [[User talk:Thomas.W|'''''<sup><small> talk</small></sup>''''']] 19:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
+:::Your reference to "first adding unsourced content regarding alleged sex abuse" interests me, in part because you did not provide any examples of it in diffs.  (despite having cited diffs prior to that, and of those merely claiming that there was "repeatedly editing".  Apparently your only objection to the edits you actually listed was that they were negative to Bean; you don't show examples of "adding unsourced content.")  Let's discuss this "unsourced content":  Question, if somebody tries to make an edit, and while he is preparing the citation the edit is reverted by someone else, does that constitute "adding unsourced content"?  Another question:  have you looked to see if anything negative about Bean, which was properly sourced, was removed with the (false) claim that it was not properly sourced?  You should be willing to admit that your allies (confederates; people of similar POV) are misbehaving.  Also, you don't seem to realize that when you accused me of an "attempt to portray [Bean] it as negative a way as possible", that is an unjustifiable accusation:  The issue isn't supposed to be whether Bean is portrayed as a child-molester, it is whether the material is verifiable and is cited from reliable sources.  If reliable sources say that Bean engaged in child-rape, then neither you nor any other person has a valid objection if that source is cited.  Your (and others') mere desire to make Bean look better than that doesn't justify cleaning up the article to remove negative material.  Also, notice that the people who want to make Bean look better virtually never use the Talk Page; if they are unwilling to justify their actions on the Talk Page, they should be presumed to be acting improperly.   [[Special:Contributions/67.5.192.83|67.5.192.83]] ([[User talk:67.5.192.83|talk]]) 19:54, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 ==About the second Official website==