Jump to content

User talk:Dr.Oak

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dr.Oak (talk | contribs) at 15:24, 15 August 2008 (talk page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please keep closed

I would like this user account to remain fully closed- especially since I have learned the hard way that all things that administrators don't understand are labled as a "hoax", valid sourcing is ignored based on "an individual's assumptions", and accusations of "hoaxing" is what rules in Wikiland. I feel very sorry for anyone who actually contributes in good faith to fix poorly written articles in need of help. If any such article has been "blacklisted" by "wikinators" as a so-called "hoax article", than anyone who choses to actualy use their brain and proceed to fix it will be banned and labled a "sockpuppet", even though there is a stub asking for expansion.

In Wikiland, no good deed goes unpunished, administrators are unknowledgable fools running matters on hunches, and in the end, truth and validity is run over by stupidity of the mob.

I truly wish that Wikipedia would just disappear, it is not a valid encyclopedia, it is not a genuine source of information, and it is mucking up search engines with all of the mindless spillage coming from endless blogging on users talk pages, which show up readily in google searches.

I am also warning anyone who happens to be interested in a "blacklisted" topic- that your efforts will be futile since no matter what you contribute and what you source it with, it will not be accepted, these administrators like the perpetuation of "hoaxes" that don't exist, and second, if you also address links within a "blacklisted" topic, it wil be used against you to say that there is a pattern of hoaxing going on- and thus you will be blocked as a "sockpuppet"- even when one is not. Acccusations of "sockpuppetry and hoaxing" are completely invalid, and are done so on hunches, not fact.

Also, important people who should be included within topics are labled as "nons" while countless "celebutantes" are glorified- and the ruling factor governing acceptance is "google" hits, a completely stupid concept when one is actually dealing with a topic of true historical importance- that requires scholarly sourcing. My advice is not for anyone to waste their time with Wikipedia, it is not a professional outfit, and the administrators are inexperienced bloggers- nothing more, its a power trip for them, to block people, calling everything a hoax, and ignore valid sourcing by ISBN and reputable publications. In short, Wikipedia is very bogus. Dr.Oak (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dr.Oak&oldid=232120682"