User talk:Irate~enwiki
Huh? Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!
Here are some tips to help you get started:
- Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
- If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
- Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
- Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!
Good luck!
P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Signing deletion text
You need to sign your deletion text, methinks. Use a ~~~ to do so. --Tagishsimon
- Thanks. --Jirate 13:18, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Styling for category names
Hello, I'm moving all the entries for "Category:Chemical Reactions" to "Category:Chemical reactions" as per the manual of style (use lower-case letters wherever possible, unless convention dictates otherwise). I hope you don't mind. -- 80.168.228.96 13:15, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- No feel free I was just theough a Cat was needed to group all the famous reactions.--Jirate 13:18, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Fox hunting
Just a note that unless the Fox Hunt and Hunt Followers pages are made slightly less biased they'll be deleted (don't blame me, just the messenger, I think cunt is a great name for hunt followers!). --Steinsky 20:56, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Irate, listing User:Jayjg on WP:VFD is a personal attack. I have removed the Vfd header and the Vfd listing, and seriously wonder what you're trying to convey. You may disagree with this user on Occupation of Palestine, but if the rage makes you put his userpage on Vfd, then obviously you need a Wikiholiday. JFW | T@lk
- Yeah. He had a little poke somewhere else I've tried to say pax in Occupation of Palestine talk page.--Jirate 23:10, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Personal attacks are not allowed. I was on the edge of deleting your rant from the Votes for Deletion page, but I decided to leave it so people can see what kind of a contributor you really are. RickK 23:44, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)
- Then stop making them, hypocrit. It's the self serving nature of apparachniks, that realy got on my nerves. Anything I said was far less offensive than the racism being promoted by some of the users.--Jirate 23:57, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Irate, please don't make things worse. Personal attacks land you on "Requests for mediation" or arbritration, the latter of which can lead to banning from the project.
- May I humbly suggest you divert your attention to a subject you're not emotional about? JFW | T@lk 08:01, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I think Jayjig cares about them immensly to that is why he is so dishonest and manipulative.--Jirate 11:29, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hi Irate, I think you are probably quite new to Wikipedia, so people may be a bit more forgiving for the moment, but your personal attacks on Jayjg are completely out of order. Whatever you think of other people's views, you have no right to attack these people personally. I don't know what you want to achieve at Wikipedia, but if you want to be able to contribute anything worthwhile in the future, you should remove all the personal attacks from the VfD page and apologise to Jayjg. - pir 11:09, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I don't really think it's you buisness to judge wether what I say or do is worthwhile.--Jirate 11:29, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It is my (and everybody else's) business if you make personal attacks. Maybe you haven't seen Wikipedia:No personal attacks, Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot, Wikipedia:Wikiquette. If you continue to violate these, if your username is also your style, and if you're only here to let off your anger, then you'll soon be banned, and rightly so. If you really want to contribute somthing to Wikipedia, you need to change your debating tactics. - pir 12:38, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- The biotry and bias of Jayjg is also everyones buisness. Hiding foul ideas behind pleasant words is dishonest and manipulative. That he's spread his attacks beyond the original topic is a sign of his manipulation.--Jirate 12:51, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- You might have the best intentions in the world, but personal attacks are simply out of order. If you really want to do something about "foul ideas" and "biotry and bias", then you can do that by editing articles and by describing what many people think is wrong with these ideas, in accord with NPOV. Have a close look at the NPOV policy. If there is a disagreement between significant views (which is apparently the case for your and Jayjg's ideas) then both views should be described (not stated as facts), sourced and attributed. If you really want to do something about "bigotry", that's the way to go, not personal attacks which sour the debate and will only get you banned. Don't take it to the personal level, deal with it at the political/historical/ideological level. - pir
- Oh, you know what? Your opponents are probably delighted about your anger, your aggressiveness and your personal attacks. It confirms their pre-formed ideas, and it means you might not be here for very long. You think it's honesty, but in reality your reaction is counter-productive. - pir 13:23, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I understand that very well, but to your own self be true.--Jirate 13:36, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Oh, you know what? Your opponents are probably delighted about your anger, your aggressiveness and your personal attacks. It confirms their pre-formed ideas, and it means you might not be here for very long. You think it's honesty, but in reality your reaction is counter-productive. - pir 13:23, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I agree with your attitude that it's essential to be honest, but there are tolerant and polite ways of being honest. I also think that some people at Wikipedia are profoundly dishonest and biased (I'm not referring to anybody in particular now), but you should consider that this dishonesty is maybe rooted in very strong beliefs in particular world-views and not due to personal defects. - pir 14:16, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I beleive then that it's their own personal world view, it's not one condoned by any of the major world views, and they are in need of a bit more intro spection. I don't intend to indulge in any more arguments and shall largly confine my self to list of facts.--Jirate 20:05, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I agree with your attitude that it's essential to be honest, but there are tolerant and polite ways of being honest. I also think that some people at Wikipedia are profoundly dishonest and biased (I'm not referring to anybody in particular now), but you should consider that this dishonesty is maybe rooted in very strong beliefs in particular world-views and not due to personal defects. - pir 14:16, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
What Pir said: personal attacks and slurs ("bigotry", "dishonest" etc.) completely sour the debate. I must repeat that if you lose your cool over Wikipedia, it is probably not worth the while. Jayjg may sound "manipulative" or "dishonest" to you, but he's a hell of a lot more polite than you have been. JFW | T@lk 13:04, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Honesty is Infinitley more important than politeness, and in my opinion, if your not being honest then you cannot be polite.--Jirate 13:13, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Apology
Jirate, I want to apologize for my loaded comments on IZAK's talk page. I have reconsidered my comments in light of Pir's helful advice and your explanation. As a result, I have removed my allegation from IZAK's talk page, and Pir is welcome to remove my comments from his talk page if he so chooses, and if he does, I will remove his comments from my talk page regarding this incident. --Viriditas 09:02, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Viriditas, no problem, I'll tidy up mine as they'll look a bit silly hanging in the air.--Jirate 12:25, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)
sex message
Sorry, but this is not part of any war. Please stop removing it. --Cantus 00:15, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
Stop placing them. You know it is controversial and you also know that the vote in Clitoris:Talk is not going the way they you want.--Jirate
Why do we have Spoiler warnings for movie articles? --Cantus 00:30, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
I'd quite happily remove them, but if I do I'll have a binding vote before I proceed.--Jirate
I don't understand?
A warning is a good compromise French wikipedia has a very similar one in it's "clitoris" article.--198 00:51, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It isn't a compromise.--Jirate 00:56, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Clitoris"
What do you mean?--198 01:03, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- The warning was imposed, it is still there, where is the compromise?--Jirate 01:19, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC)
- I feel the warning should be left alone (although I find the picture of the "clitoris" to be Pornagraphic)--198 01:23, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
POVW
About POVW, while humorous, it is not constructive. Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. — David Remahl 17:39, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Talk to the perviours of Template:sex who are trying to make a point.
- I agree fully with you, but POVW is just silly. Please remove it, make your argument for its inclusion on Talk:Penis, and let us discuss it. — David Remahl 18:29, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)