From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I am a user who will be most interested in and follow movies.

12/6/2018 comment to self: What the Wikipedia community did to Jtydog is proof of a failed system and not an open inviting group of editors. An elite group runs the system with their own rules. They say be bold but they crush new ideas and expel editors. The system burns out those who work so hard. Editors with over 100K edits only make token changes or bot changes to increase their edit numbers and not improve or expand the encyclopedia. The edit number reward system should be abolished. Those in power should look at the top ten and ask do their collective edits add to the work or does the deleted edits scare away new editors. Some really help but the autocrats are so corrosive and harmful. Why should one join the Wikipedia community. Why should I edit? Do I add value or just read the silly edit wars and see arbitrary rules enforcement. Some editors "own" certain articles and police and protect it. No one would admit that and in fact argue that any editor is equal to any other editor. That just is not true in practice. No one has clipped my wings but the treatment of Jtydog has had an effect on me. Why I don't know. I do not know him and I am certainly not part of the ruling class. Enough. Even "retired" on top of user page denied.

2019 - Leaving

A fact that is true and accurate can not be added to Wikipedia unless reliable. A doctor who knows a medical scientific fact can not add the information because it is original to him and not published and verifiable. No NOV - no original research.


The Signpost
31 January 2019

About wiki world[edit]


Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources

Wikipedia:Manual of Style

Reliability v Truth and Accuracy: