For the record, I now officially give up on Wikipedia. I stayed away (for the purposes of my sanity and blood pressure) for only about a month or so, and the Christianists have gutted most of the "Christian Terrorism" page, and are simultaneously lobbying to have it completely deleted, just as I predicted. I'd argue with them, but all that would happen is that I would get in a bad mood and waste a ridiculous amount of time. They are ripping out pretty much any Indian sources, and saying, "Well, those are just ethnic conflicts, and we don't have many non-Indian sources describing them as 'Christian Terrorist', so tough!"
Never mind that the whole reason that they have decided that Indian sources are "unreliable" is completely racist, of course.
Wikipedia is dead as a "tool" for anything except pop culture tidbits. The loudest, angriest voices carry the day, regardless of the veracity of their claims. I wash my hands of it, and vow not to even post links to WP pages, even for humorous purposes. The inmates are running the asylum.
Bryon Morrigan, J.D., M.A. March 30th, 2015
- So long Bryon, you will be missed. hope you make it back here one day. Darkstar1st (talk) 20:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)