User talk:Worldedixor

Talk Page for Worldedixor

This is my opinion on MY Talk page. By reading my Talk page, you must agree NOT to use any of my opinions against me nor "assume that you know my intent". Otherwise please do not "read" my talk page.

Reset

Forgive the long post. It is not like me.

You may be right! Really! And I can see that you are pretty upset. You must be feeling tremendous stress and frustration over this, and I'll bet it is going round and round your head even off-Wikipedia. In my personal life, I find that compartmentalizing is the best stress relief. So, I have a suggestion.

I have been reading a lot about your concerns. Keep in mind that I am trying to help you and not gang up on you. Wikipedia does not want to lose you. And I do not want to see your frustration spill over to other, good faith editors, and lose them.

My suggestion

I suggest, from this moment, splitting the whole thing in two -- the past and present.

Before this moment: First, take everything in the past and decide what to do with it. Take action in the right forum. Bring it to AN/I if you like. If you want to be heard there: short and to the point. A concise few sentences: 100 readers. A wall of text: 2 readers and 0 users will get involved because they know they will get dragged into a quagmire of billions of paragraphs.

Get rid of all this stuff on your talk page! Move the viewpoints about Wikipedia to your userpage. Definitely get rid of the stuff that names specific users. That may come back to bite you. It totally kicks the legs out from under your cause. They will say: "How can you be righteous, and how can we take your side, when you are breaching WP:POLEMIC?"

After this moment: We have both been here long enough to know how reluctant others are to take up a cause when the history is convoluted. Clarity can be the solution to getting you heard. Right now, reset. Like resetting an experiment. You behave perfectly, and expect others to as well. The benefit? From this moment on, if you are done wrong by, then nobody has to dig into a long history with lots of text to figure out who is right. Light will clearly shine, and the culprits will be exposed.

(Concise) thoughts? :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

My sincere thanks to you, Admin Anna. I brought up a chronic problem on WP that is making editors just leave, and did so in the best interest of WP. I did not. I reduced my contributions but I also spoke out. I will stand up for what is right even when I am standing alone. I appreciate your kind advice and will contemplate it. Worldedixor (talk) 23:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

A respectful correction to your wrong assumption made in good faith: "You must be feeling tremendous stress and frustration over this, and I'll bet it is going round and round your head even off-Wikipedia.". I am not stressed at all. I live a very enjoyable and happy life. This matter frustrates me a bit as I would like to see EQUALITY and JUSTICE on WP and everywhere I can make a difference. But if I see that I am beating a dead horse, I will just join the thousands of competent editors who have opted out of WP. My hope is that my speaking out will help make WP and the world a better place after I'm gone. Worldedixor (talk) 23:44, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I am genuinely pleased that you are not stressed over this.

A competent editor leaving because the dead horse would not get up? Who thinks a competent editor should be so powerful? Who says a horse should notice us ants? And this is not a dead horse. This is a living, breathing, planet-size, insane asylum. We do our part and hopefully it butterfly effects its way around. Directly trying to change how all these users do things is like herding cats. I just try to take a snapshot of the product as it is right now as say "It is a pretty good encyclopedia, somehow."

So, could not change it and left? Ha!!!! Try, can not change it by myself, right now, so will influence things in a reasonable way, keeping the viewpoints on my userpage (not the talk page as that is a pretty strange place for it), and carry on building the encyclopedia. Dandy!

I hate the incivility and swearing. But, I think I have had an influence on the community by being friendly and nice. Staying and continuing is the best way to help, I think.Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:15, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

WOW, Anna. In a few words, you earned the respect and admiration that I reserve for non-toxic admins who personify what a WP admin should be, and that tremendously helps "retain" competent editors rather than removing their joy of editing WP. Another admin with no bias that I genuinely admire is m.o.p. who apparently has enormously reduced his contributions and wish to know what happened. It is my strong opinion that if Dougweller, ATG and their pals learn from you and perhaps copy your non-bias, civility and become role models as required by WP rules, WP will benefit enormously and there would be a lot less need for WP:ANI and lawsuits in Superior courts can be eliminated. Now, I will gladly follow your advice and place my "WP continuous improvement" facts on my user page. Thanks again. Worldedixor (talk) 00:31, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

I am so happy that everything is heading in the right direction now. I don't know why Master of Puppets hasn't edited since May 6. Maybe he joined the Stone Erosion Enthusiasts Club and they're having a "granite watch". Those can really drag on. :) Thanks, by the way, for moving all of that content to your userpage. (There is still a bit of Dougweller mixed in that you might have missed.) It really is encouraging to know that you are staying. If you ever get worn out by editing hot articles, do what I do and write about some species or glacier or something. It is like a holiday into nature from the mad city. So, my friend, if there is anything you ever need, please ask. Best wishes. :) :) :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:20, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Consolidate your undos

I noticed that you undid several consecutive edits. This could be done with one edit rather than undoing each of them separately. Use the radio-buttons to select the interval of edits which you wish to revert and then click on the "undo" which appears above the displayed difference. JRSpriggs (talk) 23:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for taking the time... I will sure look into it and hope we never need to use it. Worldedixor (talk) 23:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for Justification

Copying on my Talk page, for clarity, my "now removed" original Request for Justification:

I am perplexed. Wikipedia does not permit you to just remove well sourced content of another editor. Let's work this out. In order to avoid an edit conflict, I'll give you a fair chance to give me a logical justification as to why you simply removed my well sourced content (including the well-sourced name of the soldier reported beheaded by the Islamic State in the two reliable sources), and then went ahead and removed my two non-English reliable sources [1] and [2] from two well-known and established Middle Eastern media agencies (Equivalent to the NYT and Fox news), one of them is from one media agency's official Youtube channel? The way you left my edit, my remaining contribution "appears to be" as if I have not provided any expressly permitted non-English reliable sources. Thanks. Worldedixor (talk) 19:16, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't mean to remove your footnotes; I've restored them. I removed the extra detail as I can't see how such minutiae add to the article. --P123ct1 (talk) 19:51, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

minutiae?... WOW!... This was a fallen Lebanese soldier of the Lebanese Armed Forces, the first ever Lebanese soldier to be beheaded by the Islamic State. Ali al-Sayyed has received news coverage all over the world, including but not limited to, Reuters rendering him notable. [3][4]. How is he different from the first beheaded U.S. or British soldier or James Foley or even Tim McLean? Read WP:N. Worldedixor (talk) 21:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Of course it's not minutiae for those involved, and would never dream of suggesting that. --P123ct1 (talk) 22:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC).

ISIS

I can assure you, Worldedixor, there is no tag-teaming or conspiracy going on!! Technophant and I are in contact, but we haven't violated any WP policies. It began when I helped him with his request to be unbanned and it went on from there. Whatever I do in WP is done AGF, believe it or not, though it may not look like it sometimes. I just happen to be rather a strong-minded person (we both are) and I may come across as a bit brusque and aggressive on the TP sometimes, but I mean well. To put you more in the picture, I mainly copy-edit in Wikipedia, "gnomish" editing (grammar, formatting, punctuation, etc) and do check the new entries to see if anything needs doing. (I did it with the whole article when I first started on the ISIS page.) That is probably why you think I am singling you out, but I do it to all editors, and I am not perfect and do make mistakes sometimes. Anyway, I remember what that admin said about tag-teaming/meatpuppeting, and certainly don't want to fall foul of WP's rules after that warning. I am only sorry I wasn't in on the discussion between you and Technophant earlier so that I could have had more input. Btw, I said "technically" because I hadn't, and still haven't, studied WP's further wording on this that Technophant gave. Time zone differences beckon, so will look at that and the new edit tomorrow. Anon, P123ct1 (talk) 00:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)