User talk:Ikip: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Ikip (talk | contribs)
:removed, thanks for your work :) ~~~~
No edit summary
Line 27: Line 27:
Hi, [[User:Ikip/WikiProject Inclusion]] appears in [[:Category:Wikipedian organizations]], which I'm tidying up. Is there a reason for this? If it's an active org it shouldn't really be in userspace. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] <sup>[[user talk:rd232|talk]]</sup> 20:22, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, [[User:Ikip/WikiProject Inclusion]] appears in [[:Category:Wikipedian organizations]], which I'm tidying up. Is there a reason for this? If it's an active org it shouldn't really be in userspace. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] <sup>[[user talk:rd232|talk]]</sup> 20:22, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
:removed, thanks for your work :) [[User:Ikip|Ikip]] ([[User talk:Ikip|talk]]) 20:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
:removed, thanks for your work :) [[User:Ikip|Ikip]] ([[User talk:Ikip|talk]]) 20:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

==User Talk Changes==
How did you do that???? I just left you a messagte a few minutes ago and it dissappeared...even from my watchlist. Are you a Magician???? Plus your newly designed Talk page is cool. I would suggest a summary for those of us that have the social manners to use summaries.. --[[User:Buster7|Buster7]] ([[User talk:Buster7|talk]]) 02:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:54, 20 March 2009

"Disagreeable and closed to new ideas - that's the picture that emerges of contributors to...Wikipedia from a survey of their psychological attributes." Aldhous, Peter (January 03, 2009). "Psychologist finds Wikipedians grumpy and closed-minded". NewScientist. Retrieved 2009-05-08. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) Source: "Personality Characteristics of Wikipedia Members" CyberPsychology & Behavior (DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0225)

This project does not exist to help editors grow a thicker skin. Our mission is to build an encyclopedia, not establish limits for low-level abuse that we think our volunteer editors should be willing to suffer. If we drive away more people than we attract, then it's a genuine loss to the project and we should fix it rather than label those who would prefer to work in a civil environment as "thin skinned." -- User:Cool Hand Luke [2]

The problem is that our enforcement of civility and NPA has historically been quite selective. If you're unpopular or unpowerful and criticizing somebody popular or powerful, you are likely to be blocked. The other way around, not so much. We ought to come up with objective standards and stick to them. -- User:Jehochman[3]

A reliable measure of prejudice is how many mistakes a person gets forgiven. --Durova

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard/RfA_Report

...as an approximate guide, you are likely to pass if you achieve at least 75% support. Nominations which receive less than 70% support are unlikely to be successful, except in exceptional circumstances.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Best welcome template: User:AxG/WikiWelcome1

wikipediareview: History of wikipedia

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard/RfA_Report

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Wikipedia:ARS/Tagged

Best welcome template: User:AxG/WikiWelcome1

Law_scholars_analyze_Wikipedia's_dispute_resolution_system

Deleted to GA

In case you were thinking of making that into a list, I just got Dragon kill points (A famously deleted article) up to GA after recreating it last month. Protonk (talk) 18:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

THAT is awesome! i will put you in the ars hall of fame when I get unblocked from my voluntary block. Congrats Protonk. I would mention it here too: Wikipedia_talk:Article_Rescue_Squadron#Fifth_formerly_deleted_article_recreated_and_advanced_to_GA-Class Ikip (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ikip/WikiProject Inclusion

Hi, User:Ikip/WikiProject Inclusion appears in Category:Wikipedian organizations, which I'm tidying up. Is there a reason for this? If it's an active org it shouldn't really be in userspace. Rd232 talk 20:22, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

removed, thanks for your work :) Ikip (talk) 20:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk Changes

How did you do that???? I just left you a messagte a few minutes ago and it dissappeared...even from my watchlist. Are you a Magician???? Plus your newly designed Talk page is cool. I would suggest a summary for those of us that have the social manners to use summaries.. --Buster7 (talk) 02:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]