46:
567:
perfection and without risk (which is, in reality, unachievable). I've seen this build slowly for 10+ years. For example, people nominate files (images mostly) for deletion because they don't meet some criteria. The nominators and admins who delete it fail to consider and often refuse to take the time to understand copyright law, often erring so far on the side of safety as to be completely unreasonable (I once demonstrated a file was in the public domain as the image was clearly within the defined guidelines. The response was "By just over a year...barely" and a vote to delete it because it was "just too close"...the file and its talk page were ultimately deleted).
99:
385:...and that's not just my opinion; check the link! Differences of opinion are viewed as opposition to "reliable sources" and, therefore, evidence of malfeasance/being an unreliable source. Claim NPOV all you want, but it isn't when you declare all media that doesn't toe the leftist party line as "unreliable". No, I'm not talking about InfoWars or any other right wing extremist garbage, I'm talking about anything that's right of left of center.
486:
IMNSHO, Knowledge has become a society of gatekeepers who have built an empire constructed with rules designed to tear down the work of others so they can feel morally superior rather than people who collaborate to build something (as we did in the heyday of WP). The
Wikimedia Foundation doesn't seem
424:
IMNSHO, Knowledge has become a society of gatekeepers who have built an empire constructed with rules designed to tear down the work of others so they can feel morally superior rather than people who collaborate to build something (as we did in the heyday of WP). The
Wikimedia Foundation doesn't seem
400:
Furthermore, those on the right are actively and aggressively punished while rampant incivility from the left is given a pass. I've been cussed out, insulted, shamed, and a host of uncivil behavior with no warnings whatsoever. I have been blocked by an admin who is an avowed leftist/Marxist/Communist
623:
is probably good guidance, man-woman marriage userboxes are probably needlessly divisive, people who can't accept when reliable sources disagree with them aren't here with our core values in mind -- but you're not someone I'd exclude. We should have internal disagreements on the project; when we all
529:
This is an unsolicited response, so feel free to revert. But I've been watching the A&M FAR and FAC -- though not commenting because it's not one of my areas of interest -- and absolutely agree with your complaints about how opaque FAC is. And I'm increasingly worried that if this is not all by
376:
I've been a
Wikipedian for 10+ years, but the leftist tilt/bias and open hostility to any dissent (with backing of multiple admins who openly profess anti-capitalist/socialist/communist leanings) has me reconsidering my contributions of any kind. The fact that others are probably cheering right now
49:
In my time at WP, I have never asked for people to stay off my talk page until yesterday. It was always my intent to allow for free and open communications for 14+ years now, but the number of people actively taunting/harassing me/intentionally causing angst has reached a point that I do not feel I
651:
I saw the FAC for A&M three days ago, and I just want to tell you that it isn't all bad. Sure, the reviewers appeared less than constructive when it came to the nom, but consensus is consensus and there's no viable way to get around that. It sucks, I know, but don't let it go to your head. The
618:
I've given up on ArbCom or the admin corps doing anything about having little autonomous communities trying to wall themselves out; why take action against those who are "right"? And it's hard to not understand why. If anyone were in charge of an entire encyclopedia, they'd probably want their own
416:
While
Knowledge is theoretically worried about their losses, Wikipedians aren't worried about how they are actively driving out contributors. They are reveling in it. If the WMF is genuinely interested in solving the problem, they need to look at their current users/their political leanings as the
68:
Seeing as how I'm not allowed to keep a list of those I've asked not to and why, I have no choice but to keep this list offline. If you are asked not to comment on my page and you "forget", please know I tried to keep a list so you'd know and be able to check...I will be asking for blocks if it is
883:
has not changed, but those controlling the levers have decided to label anything conservative as "unreliable" and anything leftist "reliable". It's a similar game across all of media. Fox News is no more right than the New York Times is left, but one is considered the gold standard and the other
731:
noticeboards every now and then, so when it reappears again, I'll take a look at the discussion. But although I support the article as it stands, there may still be some overlooked concerns that other editors will notice. If that is the case, I will hold off my decision until you (or I) fix the
566:
Glad I'm not alone. I think my biggest concern is what I expressed above: fiefdom-building. In that manner, WP is slowly walling itself off and elitists, while stating they want to improve WP, are actually hindering expansion efforts and improvements in the interests of attempting to achieve
538:. But FAC is just a series of unactionable complaints and unwritten norms, which requires one to speak in a secret language to decode, and make massive concessions with no basis in policy or encyclopedic writing. What other process makes it all but required to have shepherds guide newbies?
54:
and Admins are unwilling to enforce civility requirements on WP (beyond just unwilling to even issue warnings, actively deleting warnings and defending incivility). While I still believe in allowing general communication, I see no viable alternative to stop this behavior. This is a very
652:
article deserves to be a FA but there is no point dissenting with the coordinators. If I were you, I'd try to get it approved for GA class or A class at least to show off your achievements. I am 100% sure that the article will pass through those noms with flying colors.
380:
Knowledge has become a leftist cesspool categorized by groupthink and punishing any dissent, basically as corrupt as academia or mainstream press (where extreme leftists are highly dominant...in the US, 96% of journalists vote
Democrat and 90% of Academia does as well).
530:
design, then there's been a massive capitulation of coordinators' duties. Where else on
Knowledge is there such an existential aversion to working on the encyclopedia? GANs routinely have reviewers make grammar corrections and fix up sources -- that happened at my
510:
I must admit, some fandom sites can be even more dictatorial and unwelcoming. I found one which definitely welcomes changes and doesn't chase people off. Sometimes it feels like the old days. and if you can't find a wiki of your liking, make a new one.
619:
versions of truth stated as fact. I can't blame you if this is the end of editing for you - despite our disagreements on many things, the openness of editing is what makes this place valuable. This isn't some plea for absolute liberal inclusionism --
412:
The remaining part of
Knowledge seeks to tear down the work of others by pointing out flaws rather than take time to improve an article. Wikipedians are celebrated for taking pride in tearing down others rather than building anything productive.
902:. But if there are any information that is contradicting, make a note about it in the article, i.e "New York Times claims that ....." and then "Fox News claims that .....", and vice versa. Seems a lot more neutral, right? Also, we can always use
796:
I don't see it on the main page...*scratches his head* As for leaving, I'm going to confine my activities to a smaller set. But given the bias being shown here, I doubt it will ever change. Would you like to be notified next time I nom for FA?
41:
I used to be known under a different user name, however, I was outed by a colleague. Due to concerns about my personal security I request that any users "in the know" refrain from using my previous name in discussions. Thank
446:
further responses of optimism and support are genuinely appreciated; thank you. I think my statement stands on its own. Compliments are always welcome. I will also finish working on/maintaining A&M-related pages.
23:
753:
I'll take any feedback you have now. What changes have been asked for are currently unclear and I've asked for clarification. It feels very much like "do it my way or it isn't approved" overrides consensus.
464:
I apologize for not helping you out for the A&M page. I too feel burnt out. I appreciate your hard work on
Knowledge and I admire how much dedication you have put into this community. Happy New Year.
491:
into an oppressive regime of unnecessary precision/bureaucratic doublespeak wielded to punish opponents or lessers. This FAR is merely a symptom... and I don't see these people relinquishing that power.
674:
I'm not interested in dissenting with the coordinator. All I want is a clear explanation so I can address any shortcomings and an explanation how he determined consensus as it is perplexingly opaque to
541:
I remember nominating an article recently, and I was told that it reads poorly. I asked how. And I was told that FACs aren't supposed to substantially improve or change the article, despite
599:
Yes, we probably are. But I'm with you about fiefdom-building, and speaking in terms of content fiefdoms, that's especially true in my areas of interest. Take a look at articles like
430:
409:
vandalism, an exception in our policies...but that's no matter if you don't mind ignoring the rules you've said you'll uphold (look at my block log for all the evidence you need).
38:
819:
924:
I certainly don't advocate for violating NPOV, but when you define the conversation as left = neutral, you aren't achieving NPOV. I've had zero success with RfCs or DRN.
624:
work together to create a work product, there will be contradictions, based on who we are as people and what we value, but there's always, always value in contradiction.
678:
Lastly, your support would have been appreciated for FA. I have no intention of going through an additional A/GA process. This article already had GA a LONG time ago.
879:
As mentioned with
Lightburst, at this point, we have pushed to the point where leftism is dominant on WP and it's practically just a numbers game.
50:
can continue this policy (this literally includes accusations of murder). It has become increasingly clear that some people are incapable of being
401:
for "following someone" (when, in fact, I was continuing to do what I'd announced I was doing 3 days prior). Not even a warning was given to her.
403:
been banned for completely made up reasons with no clarification given despite repeated requests and it had to be taken to ArbCom to get resolved
898:
Buffs, it sucks that this is happening on
Knowledge. I believe that it would be fine to add all sources in most circumstances; we must maintain
534:, but it happens all the time. DYK reviews have people fix sourcing and review images ... and if those images are incorrectly licensed, people
367:"History is written by the victors” except on Knowledge, as your enemies are still alive & have lots of time on their hands - Elon Musk
763:
741:
722:
701:
687:
436:
Way to go. You just lost a Top 5000 contributor with over 25,000 edits and five featured articles...three were the article of the day;
692:
I did not know that I could support it, because I thought only coordinators could. However, I will support it next time it appears.
600:
520:
501:
554:
961:
947:
943:
933:
919:
915:
893:
873:
869:
633:
594:
433:
is merely a symptom... and I don't see these people relinquishing that power...the process should be labeled "FARCE".
938:
Well, let me know in my talk page when anything in that nature occurs. I will try my best to help you. Best of luck,
506:
I scratch my wiki editing itch on Fandom. I actually am an Administrator on the Civilization video game series wiki.
31:
661:
429:
into an oppressive regime of unnecessary precision/bureaucratic doublespeak wielded to punish opponents or lessers.
397:
It sure is easy to be "correct" when no opposition is allowed. All you are going to get is what agrees with you.
939:
911:
865:
737:
697:
657:
585:
each other!). The fact that we both see this, despite our differences in opinion, does not bode well for WP.
806:
383:
People have sneakily redefined "reliable sources" in terms that effectively exclude any conservative sources
781:
on the Main page, and now this. Best wishes for what you do, but I for sure would prefer being with us. --
713:
Would you like me to inform you next time I put it up? (just for clarity so I'm not accused of canvassing)
853:
55:
disappointing decision for me, but I will control what I can, even if it is limited to just my talk page.
474:
333:
315:
297:
279:
748:
733:
708:
693:
669:
653:
261:
243:
225:
207:
189:
171:
153:
135:
117:
545:. It's a black hole of effort for those who don't accede to random demands or speak their language.
834:
790:
577:
Given your interests, I think we're probably on opposite sides of the political spectrum (and I'm
859:
778:
377:
should give you a massive pause and force you to re-look at this situation, but I doubt it will.
786:
30:, my main talk page is semi-protected. If you are unable to post here, you may contact me on
830:
34:
You may also contact me via e-mail, by clicking on the "E-mail this user" link to the left.
507:
366:
82:
8:
608:
371:
884:
derided. This will not change until people realize the echo chamber they are creating.
643:
531:
394:. Note that 2 of the admins who blocked me are featured in this national publication.
782:
620:
516:
470:
812:
844:. As John Stossel pointed out, any altruism or sense of equality is simply gone.
826:
59:
51:
840:
Without more conservative voices, leftist politics will prevail masquerading as
899:
841:
629:
550:
542:
63:
392:
382:
351:
907:
903:
728:
604:
98:
70:
880:
574:
easier to criticized the work of others than make substantive improvements.
512:
488:
481:
466:
426:
418:
254:
27:
615:
for boring edit warring in its history. There are more egregious examples.
319:
290:
272:
200:
164:
121:
357:
953:
925:
910:
when in doubt. Would that help? Also, welcome back to being unblocked!
885:
845:
798:
755:
714:
679:
586:
493:
74:
32:
a page I've created exclusively for IP users and Newly Registered Users
402:
355:
625:
561:
546:
421:, a journalist and donor to Knowledge, they just stopped responding.
326:
308:
301:
283:
265:
211:
175:
353:
218:
822:
as you. I hope you keep editing, and do not let them silence you.
236:
229:
182:
157:
146:
247:
193:
139:
358:
337:
128:
340:
329:
322:
311:
304:
293:
286:
275:
268:
257:
250:
239:
232:
221:
214:
203:
196:
185:
178:
167:
160:
149:
142:
131:
124:
612:
487:
to realize their project has morphed under the guise of
425:
to realize their project has morphed under the guise of
508:
https://civilization.fandom.com/Civilization_Games_Wiki
69:
violated. This is the only warning I intend to make;
92:
864:I hope you continue editing. Not all hope is lost!
543:
that literally being acceptable per their own rules
777:Here I came to tell you how pleased I am to see
21:This user is no longer very active on Knowledge.
417:source of the problems. When approached by
58:Reasons for such choices generally involve
452:The following discussion has been closed.
440:I did was a manual edit...think about it.
601:Rapid-onset gender dysphoria controversy
26:Due to persistent harassment from an
13:
581:we have a forum like this to talk
389:And the media is TALKING ABOUT IT!
14:
985:
405:. I was even blocked for undoing
97:
1:
962:20:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
948:22:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
934:19:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
920:06:46, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
894:22:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
874:20:10, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
854:22:53, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
835:18:29, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
634:19:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
595:17:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
555:05:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
83:16:39, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
7:
807:04:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
791:11:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
607:to see versions of our own
521:05:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
502:05:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
475:05:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
10:
990:
940:Wikiexplorationandhelping
912:Wikiexplorationandhelping
866:Wikiexplorationandhelping
957:
929:
889:
849:
802:
779:Texas A&M University
764:21:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
759:
742:20:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
723:20:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
718:
702:19:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
688:17:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
683:
662:18:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
590:
497:
455:Please do not modify it.
78:
73:will be my next step.
860:Best of luck for you
749:CollectiveSolidarity
734:CollectiveSolidarity
709:CollectiveSolidarity
694:CollectiveSolidarity
670:CollectiveSolidarity
654:CollectiveSolidarity
818:I have been saying
28:indef blocked user
977:
976:
364:
363:
344:
981:
752:
732:issues. Cheers!
712:
673:
565:
485:
457:
443:
442:
359:
116:
101:
93:
18:
989:
988:
984:
983:
982:
980:
979:
978:
862:
815:
746:
706:
667:
646:
559:
532:most recent one
479:
453:
374:
360:
354:
106:
88:
87:
45:
44:
37:
36:
22:
19:
16:
12:
11:
5:
987:
975:
974:
973:
972:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
952:noted; thanks
861:
858:
857:
856:
824:
823:
814:
811:
810:
809:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
676:
645:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
636:
616:
575:
568:
539:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
459:
458:
449:
448:
373:
370:
362:
361:
356:
352:
350:
347:
346:
332:
314:
296:
278:
260:
242:
224:
206:
188:
170:
152:
134:
112:
111:
108:
107:
102:
96:
90:
47:
39:
24:
20:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
986:
963:
959:
955:
951:
950:
949:
945:
941:
937:
936:
935:
931:
927:
923:
922:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
897:
896:
895:
891:
887:
882:
878:
877:
876:
875:
871:
867:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
838:
837:
836:
832:
828:
821:
820:much the same
817:
816:
808:
804:
800:
795:
794:
793:
792:
788:
784:
780:
765:
761:
757:
750:
745:
744:
743:
739:
735:
730:
726:
725:
724:
720:
716:
710:
705:
704:
703:
699:
695:
691:
690:
689:
685:
681:
677:
671:
666:
665:
664:
663:
659:
655:
649:
635:
631:
627:
622:
617:
614:
610:
606:
605:J. K. Rowling
602:
598:
597:
596:
592:
588:
584:
580:
576:
573:
569:
563:
558:
557:
556:
552:
548:
544:
540:
537:
536:just fix them
533:
528:
522:
518:
514:
509:
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
490:
483:
478:
477:
476:
472:
468:
463:
462:
461:
460:
456:
451:
450:
445:
444:
441:
439:
434:
432:
431:This FAR/FARC
428:
422:
420:
414:
410:
408:
404:
398:
395:
393:
390:
386:
384:
378:
369:
368:
349:
348:
345:
342:
339:
335:
331:
328:
324:
321:
317:
313:
310:
306:
303:
299:
295:
292:
288:
285:
281:
277:
274:
270:
267:
263:
259:
256:
252:
249:
245:
241:
238:
234:
231:
227:
223:
220:
216:
213:
209:
205:
202:
198:
195:
191:
187:
184:
180:
177:
173:
169:
166:
162:
159:
155:
151:
148:
144:
141:
137:
133:
130:
126:
123:
119:
114:
113:
110:
109:
105:
100:
95:
94:
91:
86:
84:
80:
76:
72:
67:
65:
61:
56:
53:
43:
35:
33:
29:
863:
825:
783:Gerda Arendt
776:
727:I check the
650:
647:
582:
578:
571:
535:
454:
437:
435:
423:
419:John Stossel
415:
411:
406:
399:
396:
388:
387:
379:
375:
365:
255:30 September
115:
103:
89:
85:
57:
48:
40:
25:
17:SEMI-RETIRED
813:Final Words
372:Final Words
320:1 September
291:31 December
273:31 December
201:31 December
165:31 December
122:14 February
827:Lightburst
644:Nomination
621:WP:NONAZIS
438:everything
343:– present
334:Archive 13
316:Archive 12
298:Archive 11
280:Archive 10
572:massively
327:1 January
309:31 August
302:1 January
284:1 January
266:1 October
262:Archive 9
244:Archive 8
226:Archive 7
212:1 January
208:Archive 6
190:Archive 5
176:1 January
172:Archive 4
154:Archive 3
136:Archive 2
118:Archive 1
219:31 March
104:Archives
60:WP:CIVIL
52:WP:CIVIL
900:WP:NPOV
842:WP:NPOV
648:Buffs,
609:Kowloon
513:Oldag07
482:Oldag07
467:Oldag07
237:30 June
230:1 April
183:30 June
158:21 June
147:20 June
64:WP:SOCK
729:WP:FAC
248:1 July
194:1 July
140:10 May
71:WP:ANI
954:Buffs
926:Buffs
886:Buffs
881:WP:RS
846:Buffs
799:Buffs
756:Buffs
715:Buffs
680:Buffs
587:Buffs
570:It's
494:Buffs
489:WP:RS
427:WP:RS
407:clear
338:1 Jan
129:6 May
75:Buffs
958:talk
944:talk
930:talk
916:talk
890:talk
870:talk
850:talk
831:talk
803:talk
787:talk
760:talk
738:talk
719:talk
698:talk
684:talk
658:talk
630:talk
626:Urve
603:and
591:talk
583:with
579:glad
562:Urve
551:talk
547:Urve
517:talk
498:talk
471:talk
341:2022
330:2022
323:2019
312:2019
305:2011
294:2010
287:2010
276:2009
269:2009
258:2009
251:2009
240:2009
233:2009
222:2009
215:2009
204:2008
197:2008
186:2008
179:2008
168:2007
161:2007
150:2007
143:2007
132:2007
125:2007
79:talk
62:and
908:RFC
906:or
904:DRN
675:me.
613:Man
42:you
960:)
946:)
932:)
918:)
892:)
872:)
852:)
833:)
805:)
789:)
762:)
740:)
721:)
700:)
686:)
660:)
632:)
611:.
593:)
553:)
519:)
500:)
473:)
391::
336::
325:–
318::
307:–
300::
289:–
282::
271:–
264::
253:–
246::
235:–
228::
217:–
210::
199:–
192::
181:–
174::
163:–
156::
145:–
138::
127:–
120::
81:)
66:.
956:(
942:(
928:(
914:(
888:(
868:(
848:(
829:(
801:(
785:(
758:(
751::
747:@
736:(
717:(
711::
707:@
696:(
682:(
672::
668:@
656:(
628:(
589:(
564::
560:@
549:(
515:(
496:(
484::
480:@
469:(
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
