This user is a member of the Counter-Vandalism Unit.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
Trout this user
This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.

User talk:Winkelvi

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

Animated-Flag-USA.gif
Animated-Flag-Israel.gif



"When an editor doesn't know the difference between POV language and encyclopedic language and insists on the presence of POV language in a Wikipedia article, they need to go elsewhere. Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is being destroyed by these users who are using Wikipedia for their agenda pushing and entertainment. It's been going on for the ten years I've been here, but never so prominently as this very moment." -- Via email, from a wise, longtime Wikipedia editor who shall remain anonymous


"The reality is that Wikipedia is not a grassroots collaborative crafted through the shared effort of People Like Us. Its rules are applied selectively and secretively. It is common to find articles on living persons written up as smear jobs, replete in some cases with outright libel but more often disguised as “neutral” assessments in which undue weight is given to negative evaluations and mischaracterizations of a person’s work while their defining achievements are minimalized or left out. Victims of these hit pieces have no opportunity to address the attacks on their reputation by anonymous editors whose qualifications are frequently nonexistent. Despite Wikipedia’s stated protections against character assassination – drawn up in the aftermath of a scandal which saw a journalist smeared as an accessory to the Kennedy assassination – the rules are selectively enforced and there is a clear bias toward individuals whose work supports the status quo, whatever their field...a cabal of ideologically-motivated editors control what can and cannot be uttered by the modern Oracle of Delphi with a Kafkaesque thicket of rules that morph to suit their purposes, locking outspoken anti-establishment voices in reputational cages from which there is no conceivable escape." -- From "Wikipedia: the Modern Delphic Oracle" by Helen Buyniski, on the Gary Null Show - 25 September 2018 [1]


"There's a trend I'm noticing more and more every day in print and televised media, social media, and Wikipedia: Americans who hate President Donald Trump more than they love the United States of America. They aren't a majority but they are loud and they are being enabled by the press and the internet. And that, frankly, is incredibly dangerous and frightening." -- Me


The Facts stood in front of a crowd of Angry Agenda-Driven Finger Pointers and said: "Hey, I'm The Facts, did you want me?"

The Angry Agenda-Driven Finger Pointers replied, "We only want the part of you that supports our opinion!"
The Facts replied naively, "Ha-ha, you can't just take a part of me, silly!"
After having a bite taken out of it by The Angry Agenda-Driven Finger Pointers, The Facts sadly and with tears dejectedly said, "But...they could. And did."

True story. Just look at the politically-based articles in Wikipedia and their related talk pages for evidence.



"Jesus fucking christ, you people can bring this to ANI if you want, but I'm a fucking liberal who hates Trump and I agree with motherfucking Breitbart right now that you fuckers are bending over backwards to push you[r] POV into this article instead of making even the slightest good faith effort to be an encyclopedia."[2] -- written by a woke, honest Wikipedian



"Trust no one here or anywhere on the internet unless they are a personal friend or family member. People love to screw with others online, usually because they have empty, meaningless lives and want to take their personal misery out on others from their computer keyboards." -- Me



"Those who spend more time reverting the edits of others and directly quoting 'sources' rather than actually writing content with their own prose aren't editors, they are "users" (because they USE Wikipedia to promote their own biases and get a feeling of power by toying with the real editors)" -- Me





"Know and remember this: The title of Eliot Ness' book "The Untouchables" is also a metaphor. Untouchable individuals exist in every system that eventually becomes corrupt and organized crime isn't always criminal by immediate definition. Mafia tactics exist on various levels in practically every walk of life. Thing is, Karma is a real concept, what goes around eventually always comes around. You just have to be patient and wait it out to have that moment of satisfied vindication." -- Me







Some Wikilove for you[edit]

White Russian Cocktail.jpg White Russian
Did you know that the White Russian is not really Russian. Merely accused of being Russian. Kinda like you! – Lionel(talk) 10:18, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Fantastic! I'll be sure to drink it. Since it isn't likely to make me Russian. Never did like their winter hats lol. Thanks, Lionelt for the laugh! -- ψλ 12:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

  • OMG - seriously...that's what I had during Happy Hour at my house yesterday!!! Shhhhh...🤐 Atsme📞📧 16:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
With a side of borscht and caviar while wearing your ushanka, right? :-D -- ψλ 16:50, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Absolutely! ^_^ Atsme📞📧 16:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Nobody wears it better...? -- ψλ 16:54, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Integrity Hires.png The Barnstar of Integrity
Thank you for all your efforts at Liberty University and other articles, remaining civil and ensuring that content is encyclopedic and NPOV. Marquis de Faux (talk) 04:03, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Marquis de Faux. I try my best to accomplish all those things. Your thanks are appreciated. -- ψλ 04:05, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

It actually does make sense...[edit]

You see, I was the 🎯and not anyone else - they pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. I've heard that somewhere...funny how certain things stick in one's mind. Hope you're taking some time to enjoy the weekend, Winkelvi. Plumbing issues have been my most recent priority - seems like I've had more than my share of 💩 in my life. Now...where the hell is Karma?? 😂 Atsme📞📧 18:21, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Atsme. That plan of attack you mentioned above is #13 in a particular list, isn't it? [3] Yes, I do believe it is. Funny how real life mirrors internet life, isn't it? You've got shit issues, I've got pest issues. Waiting for Orkin to show up anytime now. At my home, that is. Hopefully, the karma bus to the rescue isn't actually this one and isn't driven by a guy named Edgar as seen in this film. Then again, he did seem to know his shitty pests and life does often imitate art! ;-) -- ψλ 18:46, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
😂😂!!!! Atsme📞📧 18:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

The sixth pillar, I guess[edit]

This is "building an encyclopedia"?

😂😂😂😂😂😂 - I just caught on to what you meant. Freaking hilarious!!! Atsme📞📧 03:31, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I did the research - you haven't quite reached the 6th pillar - there are a few more pillars ahead of you - [4]. My research does not include any of the spikes at Talk:EEng. Pardon me - I need to take a short break to doctor the rug burns on my elbows from ROTFLMAO. --Atsme📞📧 03:42, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
😂😂😂😂😂😂 -- ψλ 03:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Suicides at the Golden Gate Bridge, which is largely your work, is an excellent contribution to the encyclopedia. It is of special interest to me because I have crossed that bridge perhaps a thousand times and my father was very interested in the design and management of that bridge, and advocated for a suicide barrier. He also supported movable lane safety barriers. Both of those things came to pass after his death.

It is possible to appreciate the work that an editor does for the encyclopedia while simultaneously being concerned about some aspects of the editor's behavior. That is the case here. Please take my concerns seriously, and I will reciprocate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I have friends and relatives who were there for the building and dedication of the bridge. Yes, I'm that old. Thanks for the thanks. We need to see more of that in Wikipedia offered by administrators. Actively and often. Not in conjunction or simultaneously. Focus on the one needs to outweigh the other. I'll let you guess which is 'one' and which is 'other'. Recently saw an episode of The Waltons where John, the father, got a job in an office in Charlottesville. The boss/manager in the office was tyrannical and controlling - feared by his staff. They never got any praise or thanks but plenty of negative criticism and threats. Employees were pitted against each other through favoritism and plotted against each other in an act of survival. Places like that soon become eat-or-be-eaten. In a work environment, one gets a paycheck and so it's understandable why folks will put up with that kind of thing. In a volunteer situation, no one should, yet we do because we like the reasons why we volunteered in the first place. Praise and visible appreciation has to take the place of the paycheck for volunteers. Without it, you get discontent and people act out because that is human nature. New "bosses" often come into their management position with wide-eyed enthusiasm and the best of intentions. But with the eat-or-be-eaten environment, that enthusiasm and those best intentions are eventually replaced by less favorable behaviors, including the picayune and heavy-handedness. That's my take on the sociology and psychology of it all, at least. Nothing personal intended, just my own evolutionary observations of the parallel between the tv episode mentioned above with "this place" and how to fix it. -- ψλ 23:09, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I spend a lot of time answering questions from new editors at the Teahouse, in the hope of helping them write acceptable articles. I believe that a review of my editing history shows that I try hard to be helpful and polite, and that I thank other editors for their work quite often. I did not seek out the role of administrator and actually declined quite a few requests to put my name forward. But eventually I agreed and the community in turn agreed to give me the tools such as the power to delete unacceptable articles and to block disruptive editors. I take that very seriously and I try to be cautious and conservative in their use. It is tough to warn someone in a friendly way, but I do try and I am obviously still learning. At this point, the toughest part of being an administrator is dealing with highly productive content contributors who sometimes engage in disruptive behavior. My goal is always to work towards ending the disruption without losing an editor. This is not easy and I am the first to admit that I do not have all the answers. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Civility Barnstar Hires.png The Civility Barnstar
I've been noticing your contributions to discussions on some of the talk pages I frequent, and I'm consistently impressed by your civil approach and conduct, sometimes as the lone voice in a crowded room of opposition. Well Done! Bennycat (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Bennycat. I think there are those who would disagree with you, but I do appreciate you noticing that I truly do attempt to maintain civility as much as possible. Cheers! -- ψλ 03:17, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

YGM[edit]

MONGO, check your email. Can't post the notification on your talk page, so I'm posting it here. -- ψλ 04:27, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Checked. Remember I am a member of the Vast right-wing conspiracy...associating with me is a very bad idea on this site!--MONGO (talk) 15:39, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
As long as you are not actually a Russian agent or associated with some well-coordinated and trained group designed to infiltrate Wikipedia and push a particular agenda, I'll take my chances, MONGO. ;-) -- ψλ 15:46, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
The only agenda I ever had here was to keep the lunatics at bay. Some folks here have one purpose and that's to do nothing but promote their political ideology. They edit almost nothing else...not a bridge article, or one about a massive landslide or even about a mountain or a monument like Mount Rushmore. All they edit is political articles...and oddly, almost none of them get sanctioned, unless they are truly horrid. The admin corp on the site defend them, even when they openly state that they have nothing but negative sentiments about the subject they are editing...I guess they could be thanked for admitting their bias, but sure strikes me as odd as hell that their constant efforts to emplace nothing but negativisms into these same bios are held to be beacons of neutrality. Anywhere else, like in some place where sanity reigns, this entire theater event would be comical.--MONGO (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Amen, brother -- preach it! There are so many other things important and enjoyable in this world to add and edit than politics. I've spent quite a bit of time and honest effort editing each of the things you mentioned above (as you know), in attention to contributing images I've spent much time prettying up and taking on my own. How incredibly joyful it is to just do that and not have to face near-immediate reversion of my thoughtful edits because of an agenda to be pushed or to have to endlessly defend an addition or removal of content. Some people live for controversy, division, and dissention. Some do that as well as seeking to crush what they see as an online opponent. What gets criticized? The honest editing effort. What gets ignored? The controversial, divisive, dissenting behavior. What gets praised? Not the good articles created, the good content added, the beautiful images gifted. If more attention was paid to the good behavior over the bad behavior with the good behavior rewarded, the perpetrators of the bad behavior would see that and seek it for themselves, eventually abandoning the bad behavior. In turn, if the perpetrators of the good behavior would feel properly rewarded and see the bad behavior quelled, there would be less arguing between the good and bad and the good would prevail. It's basic behavior management. But, you have to have a majority of good among the rewarders to make it work the right way. There in lies the rub. -- ψλ
And that my friends is exactly why a place like AE or arbcom are failures. Unless someone is a monk here and has never engaged in a "battlefield" discussion, even the very best at being cordial will trip up more than once...sometimes really nastily as its a normal human condition. When faced with object ignorance we can decide to either not argue with fools or almost inevitably make oneself look the fool for arguing. Of course some of us need a prodding, a reminder or two to simmer down, but the ban and block buttons are used to frequently, too unilaterally, etc. and all that does is foster resentments, especially if this action has a very partisan application.--MONGO (talk) 18:29, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Or join this as I did like 13 years ago! [5]--MONGO (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

MoS and first names[edit]

Hi. Regarding Cindy McCain and your edits to "remove misuse of first name per MOS" etc, have you seen MOS:SAMESURNAME? It explicitly permits usage of first names in certain contexts, such as for political couples, where otherwise the writing would get too confusing or awkward. Wasted Time R (talk) 15:13, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

The answer to your condescending question: yes, I've seen the policy. With the proper use of pronouns and nouns in the content, use of her first name or her husband's first name/first name with last name is unnecessary. And actually, how it was written, was extremely awkward. But if you read closely the policy you noted above, the use of first names isn't justified. Good, intuitive, and creative writing eliminates the need for what you are suggesting, Wasted Time R. -- ψλ 15:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Not meant to be condescending at all and I apologize if it came across that way – MOS:SAMESURNAME is separated by an intervening section from MOS:SURNAME and my experience has been that even veteran editors sometimes miss it. As for the policy, different people interpret it differently. I was peripherally involved in the creation of MOS:SAMESURNAME and I know that some other articles which rely on it use unadorned first names and joint first/last names more often than you do. That said, I don't intend to contest your changes. Wasted Time R (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Very pleased you had not intended to sound condescending, Wasted Time R, and I appreciate you clarifying. -- ψλ 16:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

You've been mentioned here at ANI. Leaving a procedural notice. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification, SNUGGUMS. Coincidentally and completely by accident, I also made note of MF's behavior in reverting and ignoring advice from several editors at WP:AN here: [6]. -- ψλ 01:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Imagine the odds of our timing :P. Just read your post, and I'm sure at least one thread will lead to a block. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
SNUGGUMS, I simply don't understand why she would do what she did when (a) she knows that kind of behavior is what got her blocked to begin with; (b) she promised not to lather, rinse, repeat; (c) she was told to not go there by several admins at the AN thread as well as at Drmies' talk page just hours after she was unblocked. -- ψλ 01:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Quite frankly, neither do I. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:14, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Reminder[edit]

If you are genuinely in good faith trying to help MaranoFan to integrate back to the community, I would suggest in a similar situation next time, please leave a message at their talk page first, wait for a little bit to give them a chance to self-revert, and if nothing happens after that, then revert with individual justifications (not with the same copy and pasted edit summaries). Otherwise it gives a different impression regardless of you are saying. Alex Shih (talk) 02:58, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Sure, I can do that. And yes, I was genuinely in good faith trying to help MF integrate back into the community. Why in the world would I lie about it? I'm not known in Wikipedia as a liar, why the fuck would I start now? Thanks for the note. -- ψλ 03:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Alex Shih (talk) 03:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018[edit]