This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 66.183.96.74(talk) at 08:38, 10 December 2009(various general responses and comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 08:38, 10 December 2009 by 66.183.96.74(talk)(various general responses and comments)
If you feel that I have reverted an edit or issued a warning in error, please click here and let me know. I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please don't interpret an error on my part as a personal attack on you. It's not, I promise. I ask you to simply bring it to my attention; I am always open to civil discussion. (I will respond on your talk page.) Thank you.
Attention Vandals!!! If you are thinking of vandalizing this page, think again.You have a better option of vandalizing here. Vandalism done there will not be counted and you will get another chance to repent your actions.You can then contribute to Wikipedia constructively. If you ignore this warning and vandalize this page, then you are guaranteed a block. Thank you.
This page last updated at 2009-12-10 08:38:55.
I honestly do not believe I have be destructive in any way. I have only added to Wikipedia. Unsigned comment by Rpe100
Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Vandalism cannot and will not be tolerated. Common types of vandalism are the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, and the insertion of nonsense into articles.
In what possible way can you possibly mis-characterise my redirect to the Wiktionary definition of "Indigent" as vandalism? ...
The redirect to Wiktionary is appropriate and correct, because the Wiktionary entry actually defines this word, whereas the Wikipedia article is a general discussion on the history, causes and possible programs to reduce poverty ... which may allude to "indigent" but in no way is enlightening in terms of defining the word "indigent" ... please find something constructive to do if you wish to be a positive influence on Wikipedia.
I know several people who previously contributed to Wikipedia, but no longer do so because they are fed-up with others who are less knowledgeable than themselves distort or destroy what they have contributed, often in the name of "vandalism" or "lack of citations" ... Wikipedia is not and never should be a mirror of Google. Just because something cannot be verified with a few clicks does not mean it is false (as some here seem to believe).
Please don't rush to the keyboard and fire off some poorly thought out knee-jerk response. You need to ponder whether what you are doing is actually helping or hindering the future viability and reliability of Wikipedia. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 20:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Articles in Wikipedia must redirect to another article in Wikipedia. An alternative way is to give the meaning of the term and then add the Wiktionary box to the article. I guess that will solve the problem. OK, I admit it..That was not vandalism; I had withdrawn those warning in my next statement to you. And if you are such a great contributor, to show your loyalty to Wikipedia, pls sign up an account. Don't criticize users such as me who contribute to Wikipedia with a user name. and I will strike off my warning; Do not lose heart, we cannot lose more editors and you are always welcome to contribute.aruntalk03:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was unaware that there is a policy precluding the use of inter-wiki redirects. I have seen inter-wiki links in use in various situations, although I cannot recall seeing one before as a redirect. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If inter-wiki redirects are not kosher, then I think the only alternative is to create a short page for Indigent with disambiguation links to Poverty and other possible interpretations as well as related Wiktionary inter-wiki links (boxes). 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did note that you have stuck-out and subsequently deleted your original challenge of vandalism, which I accept and acknowledge and consider offence retracted and now closed. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At present I am up to my neck in work and not sure that I can commit to this project in the near term, so I will see how it goes and may well formalize my participation at some time in the future. Meanwhile, I will gain Wiki experience and contribute as and when my domain knowledge or experience as well as time resources permit. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And pls do not call any one vandal in their talk pages. It is considered as personal attack though I know that at this point you are frustrated.No hard feelings and happy editing.. aruntalk03:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, but what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. As the record shows, it was YOU who called ME a vandal first. As you have duly noted, you should not be surprised then that I DID consider it a rather personal and uncalled for attack on ME and my contributions to this open source, volunteer powered community resource ... but as noted above, I acknowledge that you retracted your initial claim of vandalism, and so, as above, I consider the issue of vandalism closed. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I do appreciate your providing a suggestion for another way to achieve the objective. I understand that this is a constructive approach and appreciate that. However, I also note that the Wiktionary box you refer to is in the External Links, not at the top of the page where it would be more appropriate, but then again, this is the Wiki page on Poverty not a Wiki page on Indigent. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In any event, the primary issue with the current redirect of Indigent to the Wikipedia page on Poverty is that the literal meaning of Indigent is from the Latin and means, basically, lack of ... which could, and often is, used to mean poverty / impoverished / penury / etc. ... but it could equally well mean paucity / shortage / inadequacy / frailty / etc.. I could go on, but the point is that poverty is just one of many possible meanings (definitions) of Indigent ... and this is the crux of the reason why it is misleading and incorrect to redirect this to poverty. In retrospect, I now realize that the current Wiktionary definition is also inadequate. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If indeed, there is some protocol that discourages or prevents inter-wiki redirects, then there has to be another solution. The only one that occurs to me is to remove the redirect and either create a new page for Indigent (complete with Wiktionary box) ... or make it more of an expanded disambiguation page or some thing in-between. 66.183.96.74 (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
