User:Zotel
As usual, agenda editors revert even the most minor neutral edits that don't go along with their religious orthodoxy. I'm done for now. Neutral objective views on anything but the most banal of issues is dead. Stupid backward petty tyrants.
Taking a "disgusted with sourcing nitpickers" break. It is IDIOCY to tag every sentence for sourcing when there are section and article tags for that. Ps the sopa protest stank btw.
 | Zotel is a participant in WikiProject Louisville, an open collaborative effort to coordinate and develop appropriate, comprehensive and well-connected content covering metropolitan Louisville, Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia. Join us! • Patrol changes • Cleanup issues (3,415 in 2,156 articles) • Project Talk
WikiProject Louisville Alerts have been posted:
Articles for deletion
Requested moves
Articles to be split
|
Until further notice:
 | Zotel is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon. |
| Wikipedia:Babel | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| Search user languages |
Newbie, fixing minor details on other people's entries, and producing a number of very basic, disjointed stubs for things that seem like they should at least have SOMETHING out there. (see Wikipedia:Stub Makers)
I live just outside of Louisville Kentucky in Shepherdsville so a great number of my new stubs will probably be area specific, although I have a number of "universal" interests that I may contribute to.
Still learning the edits and codes, but I try to catch at least the basic formatting errors, if not the grammatical ones.
---
Hmm, it appears I am tweaker, not really a stub maker. Ah well, tweakers are people too...
Zotel - the Stub Maker 05:09, 16 August 2005 AD (UTC)
---
Did a major revamp of Fixed-wing aircraft based on the old version combined with the portugese version as translated by babelfish. Oy. I think I won't do that again for a while. Zotel - the Stub Maker 23:34, 22 October 2005 AD (UTC)
---
I also edit the Memory Alpha and Star Wars wookiepedia when I get bored for a change of pace...
http://memory-alpha.org/en/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=12.208.205.198 http://starwars.wikicities.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=12.208.205.198
(EDIT: This IP expired around March 2, 2006 - new IP will list later - As of 3/2/2006 using 12.202.211.39) (Yet another IP starting 5/8/06 - 74.130.44.59)
Zotel - the Stub Maker 23:09, 17 November 2005 AD (UTC)
---
Gotta love the disambig pages. Except for the fact people link to them incessantly. If wikipedia had a paid staff, I bet that could be almost as big a department as vandal reversions. I roam thru using random links to find things to fix, so decent disambig pages boost my editcount considerably. Along with bad templates, or repetitions of the the same bad idea across multiple articles. fun. Zotel - the Stub Maker 03:28, 19 December 2005 AD (UTC)
---
Hmm. I notice everyone seems to get hot and bothered when anything on Wikipedia gets too "Amero-centric" ... At least until (American) copyright laws come into the equation. Then, by golly, we MUST follow the American model of letting a stupid mouse be copyrighted ad-infinitum (sp?) and follow all the US's wonderful rules. Um, k? And don't even get me started on the limited copyright period thing. STOP extending it. Let go of the mouse. Just let it go. Come up with another original thought, or say "the Original Mickey" or some such. Sheesh. Zotel - the Stub Maker 17:41, 24 December 2005 AD (UTC)
---
Jimmy Wales - "This is a radical strike at the heart of an increasingly shallow, proprietary and anti-intellectual culture. It is a radical strike at the assumption that the Internet has to be a place of hostile debate and flame wars. It is an appeal to the best within all of us."
Whatever Jimmy. Anti-intellectual? Some, but not the driving force per se, just a leaning towards entertainment a lot. Debate is good. Hostile is not inherently bad, say debating neo-nazis. Shallow? Only people who want to be deeper will be, you can't very well force it. Proprietary? Umm. Linux? Sure there are patents and copyrights, but you should be able to make money on your idea or work for a limited amount of time. I prefer optimism, to Don Quixote windmill jousting attitude. Zotel - the Stub Maker 01:31, 1 January 2006 AD (UTC)
---
Umm, Jimbo, old bean, methinks that discouraging community between members, (ie excessive userbox restriction ideas) is a tad counterproductive. After all, it can be useful in determining the source of POV in an edit conflict, and lets people actually get to know each other just a little better. And if you point out a POV, and explain it from their POV and why its not NPOV maybe, just maybe you can foster understanding between the two, or maybe prevent an edit war... Zotel - the Stub Maker 00:36, 7 March 2006 AD (UTC)
---
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About
Section: Summary of strengths, weaknesses and article quality in Wikipedia
"all notable views become fairly described"
NPOV yes. Denying reality of POV's, NO.
Zotel - the Stub Maker 01:44, 15 March 2006 AD (UTC)
---
It's amazing how often people don't care about sources or formatting or anything else unless you step on their editing toes. I let things slide most times, but when within the same article they tag your portions unsourced and fact (after adding their material and gutting every bit of the previous article), and neglect to add the tags to their portion AND gripe about the format of sourcing (which is a guideline for formatting NOT policy/rule), then cite civility when you point out their lack of sourcing you begin to understand that "assuming good faith" has more than likely gone out the window... Zotel - the Stub Maker 02:39, 19 October 2006 AD (UTC)
---
Geez comic nerds, once in a while link to the CORRECT Daredevil, Magneto, etc etc. Sick of fixing these links for the moment, but at least put a dent in them... Zotel - the Stub Maker 21:13, 5 November 2006 AD (UTC)
---
Statements of violence
Statements that encourage, and/or condone, specifically, acts of violence against any person(s) or group(s) are not allowed on user pages. This only includes the mention, or implication, of specific violent acts – for example, murder or rape. It does not, however, include statements that support controversial groups or regimes, that some may interpret as an encouragement of violence.
If you support restoration of the Khmer Rouge, Nazism, Soviet Communism, et al, you'll always have a safe harbor on wikipedia if your genocidal views aren't specific? Lol. Zotel - the Stub Maker (talk) 00:38, 20 July 2009 AD (UTC)
---
Now I remember why I stopped actively editing: tyranny of the masses and asses. POV locked rules rule idiocy. Zotel - the Stub Maker (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2009 (UTC)