Stating that a term is used in a given context does not imply any agreement or disagreement with that usage, it simply states the usage exists.
Wikipedia is growing all the time, and many new people are getting involved in this article--that's great! But it means that some people do not understand our policies, and it is clear from the past few days' discussion that we need to sort some things out.
In other words, we do not distinguish between different types of articles because some policies apply to some and some policies do not apply to some. It goes without saying that only material that is relevant should go into an article.
Beyond that, our core policies are
WP:NPOV which states that all notable significant views about a topic must be represented neutrally;
WP:V which states that all notable significant views must also be verifiable. This does not mean that they have to be true or right or good.
In fact, Wikipedia editors are encouraged to add views thought to be false, wrong, or bad - as long as they are notable significant and verifiable; meaning there is evidence available to anyone that people actually hold this view.
Closely related to WP:V is WP:RS, which states that views should come from reliable sources. Reliable does not mean true or right or good, it means well established. The New York Post, The Daily News, The Village Voice, The Wall Street Journal--all represent a wide range of views and it is likely that everyone has contempt for at least one of these newspapers. But, they are all considered reliable sources for the news.
Finally, WP:NOR, no original research. Even if we read through lots of news reports and develop a sophisticated analysis of the news based on solid research, we cannot put it into an article. The bottom line is, editors simply do not put our own views into articles. That really covers the main policies that should guide us in writing this article.
Some people have thrown around the phrase BLP, which stands for "Biography of Living Persons." BLP does not refer to a type of article - like I said, from the perspective of Wikipedia policies, there aren't any different types of articles, all articles are subject to the same policies.
BLP does not say that some articles are biographies; it says that sometimes we add to an article biographical content and it provides some important points about how to do that. WP:BLP basically reiterates what I just said: we need to comply with the same policies we comply with in articles on gravity and Australia and golf.
What the BLP policy says is that when we add biographical information to an article we need to be especially careful to use reliable sources, most assuredly if the material is contentious. It doesn't say we cannot add contentious material, only that, if we do, we need to bend over backwards to make sure the source is reliable.
Moreover, we should be careful not to write in a titillating or sensationalistic style. Likewise, when we add criticisms (which NPOV practically demands we will) we have to be sure they come from reliable sources.
Slrubenstein Talk 19:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC) from Archive 32
Buster7 has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to
__________________(video game), you will be
blocked from editing. --
Buster7 (
talk) 01:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
RETRVED FROM TALK:ARTHUR_RUBIN
If you read WP:TALK it gives me the permission to remove those comments.-- Otterathome ( talk) 14:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Very enjoyable and informative articles. (Bombardment/Second Walls of Brussels) I'm glad that the number of articles pertaining to Belgium is growing, and that an editor of your obvious ability is envolved. I'm rather new to the "hands-on" history of Belgium so I really appreciated their clarity. Thanks.--Buster7 (talk) 22:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Hej Buster,
you keep removing the remark that in Dutch jokes Belgians are often depicted as _________. While this is biased in itself, the practice is a fact (just like the fact that in Belgian jokes the Dutch are often depicted as being greedy and moneygrubbing). If you insist to remove the fact that Belgians are depicted as __________ you should remove the remark on jokes on Germans as well. No more are "the Germans" arrogant as "the Belgians" are _______. It seems you are a bit biased yourself (perhaps this has to do with you Belgian ancestry?)....Richard 13:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It's a way of announcing when a job is done, something like "voila" in French. If you're giving someone a complicated list of instructions, you might say it when you get to the end. But I don't know anything about the etymology, sorry! — FIRE! in a crowded theatre... 18:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Hej Buster,
I've got a small hint for you: when you're including links to pages on Wikipedia you seem to have a preference for "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XXX" which results in " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XXX". You could also write [[User talk:XXX]] which results in User talk:XXX. The links lead to the same web page but the first is an external link and the second, an internal link. And since you don't walk out the front door to get from the living room to the bedroom (or so I presume) why would you do so with hyperlinks? If you do want to add a link to a web page outside of Wikipedia the preferred way of doing so is [http://some.web/page.htm Description of that page] which results in Description of that page. Just to let you know.
Richard 07:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I request Civility. I am editing in good faith. It is nice to see that your are so interested in the articles I am visiting. The attention is gratifying. I don't understand how we can be visiting/editing the same articles all the time. It has to be more than just coincidence. The Low Countries I can understand...a common interest. Hans Brinker...maybe a chance meeting. But...TIM MOORE!!!..a deceased Illinois comedian???? Now thats a s-t-r-e-t-c-h!!! I ask for a truce. What is your purpose in stalking me? It doesn't seem to be quality editing. It seems to be something else.--Buster7 (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Buster7, I am not saying that me popping up in those articles is a coincidence. I will try to give you an explanation later today. (I'm sorry, but I don't have much time now.) Mr X ( talk) 08:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I have decided to take a vacation from the Low Countries area and articles related to it...(except for the one just now)..it is hard not to edit. Please do not follow me!-- Buster7 ( talk) 12:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
No problem, I also edit other people's userpage! See also User:Stevenfruitsmaak/Userboxes:
their, to, your, its, ... | This users english is far from being perfect!. |
--
Steven Fruitsmaak (
Reply) 14:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Definition: a sour fellow that does not brook dissent; someone that does not play well with others; someone who needs a hug! LOL
Why are you doin' what your doin'? What your doin is un-doin everything I'm doin'. Which isn't a nice thing to do. 'Cause then I have to un-do what you do when what you do has undone what I do. I do what I do...and your right there...behind me...to un-do it. That's not right! Do I undo what you do....NO! Who are you to do what your doin'? We both know it has very little to do with doin' what's right. Please...stop doin what your doin...or someone else may have to do what they do to get you to stop doin' what you do. You've done it before, do-ode (dude). This isn't the first time and I'm not your first stalking victim. Do something else!!! Do a "doobie"!!! In the words of Frank Sinatra, "doobie, doobie, do"--Buster7 (talk) 00:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Retrieved
I have attempted to resolve an issue with ________________...but he continues to stalk me. His actions continue even now. I have tried to make light of it so as not to give him the satisfaction of an angry reply. I do not want to get into the long-winded, verbose, never ending conversation that he does. But...I can not do ANY editing without him coming behind me and undoing them...in reverse order the articles are... 1) White Bass. 2) Fremont, Wisc. 3) Desiderus Erasmus. 4) Hans Brinker and the Silver skates. 5) Tim Moore. 6) Low Countries 7) Belgium 8) Dutch customs and ettiquette.
There are more. But these should show a preponderance of action that is contrary to Wiki-Standards. Earlier ..before I left for work...I was ready to move on and leave the Low Countries to Iblardi and his ilk. It wasn't worth the aggrevation.....Please respond ASAP. --Buster7 (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)(Retrieved)
I think I did it right....ie...I just submitted a formal request for a dispute resolution.--Buster7 (talk) 01:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)(retrieved)
The same goes for the provocative accusations above. I merely observe that this user is putting up a masquerade. Normally I am not at all quick in accusing other editors. Just for the record, how can I be a "Right Fighter"? I engage in factual discussions on talk pages all the time (for instance [2], [3], [4], etc., including with the above user ( [5], [6]). I am generally a cautious editor ( [7], [8]). I do help newcomers ( [9]) and I correct myself at times when it becomes clear that I made a mistake (removing my own contribution after a talk page discussion: [10]). User:Buster7 also created an article of questionable notability (probably taken from the cover of the book he was using for his edits on the Low Countries: [11]), which I didn't touch since I saw no factual inaccuracies. Hardly an editor who "has to be right" at all costs, it seems. Mr X ( talk) 17:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, I think that someone who is genuinely concerned with this issue does not post frivolous reactions like this one: [12]. And this explanation [13] about a "brother" who allegedly has been checking all of this user's contributions and has done so for years (while the user professes to be a newcomer) doesn't sound convincing to me. And even here -- a Jesuit teacher who is an ex-marine? How plausible is that? Mr X ( talk) 18:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
(Whatever story you made up about what I wrote or who I am, is Your story. It really has very little to do with me. Like your interpretations of my edits they are far from the truth)
This is my final talk with you. At such a time when an administrator gets involved in our "situation", I will respond to any and all claims that you make. But until then, I will not respond to any request to talk. About anything. So, dont bother to ask.-- Buster7 ( talk) 20:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Buster7. Maybe I got a bit carried away and misinterpreted your behaviour. I have given it some thought, done some research on the internet, and come to the conclusion that I might have been overreacting to your contributions. You may after all just be who you profess to be. I should have taken into account the fact that different people have different ways of expressing themselves and shouldn't have been that suspicious towards you. Looking at it from your perspective I can see now that it comes across as bullying, and I hate to be a bully. I'm sorry I have been questioning your motives. Please accept my apologies. Mr X ( talk) 20:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Lets agree we got off on the wrong foot. However it happened, whatever was said..is "water under the bridge." I haven't heard anything from editor assistance and at this juncture I consider it a dead issue. I'll let it (my request) sit there just to see if someone responds and how long it takes (an experiment)...but I wont pursue it. My biggest worry is that, down the line, you will "stalk" someone else. So...if, down the line, you get that strange, mis-trusting urge...let me know. Really!
I dont want to share emails or have a cup of coffee; I just DON'T want to have an enemy out there in WikiLand. I have a feeling we will both be editing here for awhile. Who knows what the future holds? But, from my side of the street, there is NO animosity, NO anger, NO need for revenge.
My intentions are to edit in good faith. I really do appreciate your change of heart/direction/mind. It's not easy. Take Care...Bedankt, eh!-- Buster7 ( talk) 04:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
User subpageWolf River rig article:
You missed an angle bracket with the closing </ref> tag, which messed it up. I fixed it. Btw, you may want to look at {{ Cite book}} and other citation templates that help you format a citation. -- soum talk 10:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Mumford, David (1999). The Red Book of Varieties and Schemes. Lecture notes in mathematics 1358. Springer-Verlag. doi: 10.1007/b62130. ISBN 354063293X.
some unsolicited advice... When linking to a wikipedia article you should use two sets of brackets: [[ ]]. When linking to an external website you should only use one: [ ]. A wikilink to the article on google looks like this: Google and results in this: Google. Linking to the google website looks like this: [14] and results in this: [15]. You have a tendency to link to external sites with an unnecessary set of brackets, so that your contributions often look like this [ [15]] and result in this: 16.
There is no one definition of "language" that is agreed upon by all and appropriate for all purposes. As a result, there can be disagreement, even among speakers or linguistic experts, as to whether two varieties represent dialects of a single language or two distinct languages. For this part of ISO 639, judgments regarding when two varieties are considered to be the same or different languages are based on a number of factors, including linguistic similarity, intelligibility, a common literature, the views of speakers concerning the relationship between language and identity, and other factors.
"If I were king," Brel himself once said, "I would send all the Flemings to Wallonia and all the Walloons to Flanders for six months. Like military service. They would live with a family and that would solve all our ethnic and linguistic problems very fast. Because everybody's tooth aches in the same way, everybody loves their mother, everybody loves or hates spinach. And those are the things that really count."
"In Flanders, standard Dutch is the mother language of only a few, because that role is bestowed to the dialect"...Hans Van de Velde
"tussentaal"...in-between language or "verkavelings vlaams"...idiomatic differences...intelligible...can an oost vlaanderen nan west vlaanderen verstaan?...voortrekkers=pioneers...
The Friesian breed is centuries old. The Romans were among the first to mention the Friesian as a strong working horse. Because of the breeds' strength, docility and endurance ,the Friesian was pressed into service by German knights as a war horse during the Crusades. The Friesian received an infusion of Andalusian blood when the Spanish occupied The Netherlands during the 16th century. These horses became much valued as saddle and carriage horses by the nobility, and can been seen portrayed in the art of the old Dutch Masters. The industrial revolution nearly wiped out the Friesian breed. Careful and strict breeding practices have brought this Baroque horse back from the brink of extinction. The history, constitution and temperament of theFriesian has closely paralled that of the "Spanish " horses mentioned in Christine deHerrera's article above and modern day Friesian owners are drawn to this breed for the very same reasons as noted above.
=
I see you have fallen into "The Deletion Web"...suggestion #1) Try not to move. That will only bring you know who. #2) Find another administrator that is NOT a deletionist. At least you may find out why it was deleted. #3) Keep Sailing (editing)..."keep the wind in your sails" #4) Have Fun.-- Buster7 ( talk) 02:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED
Can you help me out in any way? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.Thank you, Ebayrockstar ( talk) 02:51, 29 June RETREAVED
I'll read the article but I'm not really sure I can help. Note: use "double colon (:)" to indent your comment or reply from the previous entry in a running conversation. When you check out
delete or edit you will see there are other ways for an editor to handle previous chat. Be assured, however, that your actions are far from vandalism. Any administrator would see the good faith error of a 'newbie"...well...almost any administrator--
Buster7 (
talk) 04:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED
I am surprised and dissapointed at how this editor, Ebayrockstar, is being treated. While his article may or may not be the most blatant attempt at free-advertising (POV) that doesn't mean he should be attacked as if he were a rabid dog that just entered the room. The article is not garbage. I've seen garbage. And it certainly isn't terrible. Is this how we should treat a new guest at Wilipedia? I don't think so.--
Buster7 (
talk) 05:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
see
WP:Newbies--
Buster7 (
talk) 05:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED
TNTRide is a notable company. I'm tired of trying to justify that. Yes I'm trying to help them out and yes the CEO does have a brain tumor. There are things in life that are good deeds. I believe in doing good deeds, I also believe in karma. I'm not backing down I will compose a noteworthy article for them and it will be superb. I'm not sure what Wikipedia classifies notable as, but a company that has a trademarked logo and branding would classify pretty notable in my book. Not to mention their graphics designer just happens to be Chris Angel's graphic designer "Stefanie Lynn Evans". I'm sorry but I just don't agree with all this utter discrimination, however if your willing to help me accomplish this I would be very grateful. I want to make friends here not enemies. Please help me do good for them and show me the ways to write a good Wikipedia article. Ebayrockstar ( talk) 02:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED '
Thank you for your recent intervention and concern. I'm glad you understand the energy that overflowed at the cabal site. Thank you for the steps you took to prevent almost definite retaliation should it have been discovered by the "wrong" editor. Together let's look at something tho. Lets look at what one little sentence can create. Everything that followed my edit at that site was unnecessary and would NOT have happened if the first editor had merely communicated instead of reverted. I am very reasonable. But, his "trigger happy" style set into motion all that followed: wasted time and words that should have been devoted to the task at hand-editing articles. Envolvement by 5-6-7 editors. Let's you and I consider that what happened to me is multiplied enourmously all across Wikipedia since rapid deletion is seen by some as their calling. At this point it is just an observation. But, as we can see, the actions of one effect many. I regret the "bastion" sentence but I don't think I could have predicted the firestorm that followed. Thanks again-- Buster7 ( talk) 11:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from_____________----
|
|
}}
The norm of reciprocity is the social expectation that people will respond to each other in kind -- returning benefits for benefits, and responding with either indifference or hostility to harms. The social norm of reciprocity often takes different forms in different areas of social life, or in different societies. All of them, however, are distinct from related ideas such as gratitude, the Golden Rule, or mutual goodwill. See Reciprocity (social and political philosophy) for an analysis of the concepts involved.
"real research in classical languages using primary sources following established historical methods"...Slrubenstein
"Tis as if God himself had stepped out of the clouds to reward me, oh, delightful day this...Pizza Puzzle (Jimbo Wales visit)
The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory, first developed by the German syndicalist sociologist Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties. It states that all forms of organization, regardless of how democratic or autocratic they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop into oligarchies. The reasons for this are the technical indispensability of leadership, the tendency of the leaders to organize themselves and to consolidate their interests; the gratitude of the led towards the leaders, and the general immobility and passivity of the masses.
The term is commonly used to describe any group involved in overzealous enforcement of specific tastes or views (e.g. "the style Gestapo", "the political-correctness Gestapo", "Gestapo tactics")....The power of the Gestapo most open to misuse was called Schutzhaft - "protective custody", a euphemism for the power to imprison people without judicial proceedings.
This is pretty apparently someone looking to block/ban. This whole, "Don't answer back, or else" tactic has been used, from the days of the playground to the days of international politics, simply to ensure that someone replies. Such language is graceless and uncivil, because it is rhetorically designed to provoke. People who are civil seek to find ways to make sure that all sides are happy, not that anyone is silent. Trying to shove people through/out the door is the very definition of uncivil behavior.
6,000+ |
en | This user is a native speaker of the English language. |
![]() |
This user is from East-Flanders. |
![]() | According to
The Political Compass this user is: Economic Left (−2.25) and Social Libertarian (−2.87) |
![]() |
This user is from Antwerp. |
![]() | This user supports the De Rode Duivels |
![]() | This user is a citizen of the United States of America. |
![]() | This user lives in
Illinois, the Land of Lincoln. |
![]() | This user lives in or hails from Chicago. |
![]() |
![]() 12 | This user has visited 12 of the 208 countries in the world. |
![]() | This user assumes good faith. |
![]() | This user was a member of the League of Copyeditors. |
nl | Dutch These users can speak Dutch language. |
![]() | This user enjoys the works of Robert A. Heinlein. |
![]() | This user is a member of the Association of Mergist Wikipedians. |
![]() | This user rescues articles for the Article Rescue Squadron. |
![]() | This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. |
![]() | This user enjoys electronic music. |
![]() | This user enjoys playing poker. |
RC | This user drinks RC Cola. |
![]() | This user is a certified scuba diver. |
![]() | This user is just another brick in the Wall. |
![]() | This user studied at The Art Institute of Chicago. |
nl-be | This user has Flemish as native language. |
![]() | This user does NOT support the unification of Flanders and the Netherlands. |
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For your constant help making Wikipedia a nice place for all of us to stay. Miguel.mateo ( talk) 14:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
![]() |
A Lucky Penny | |
In the spirit of "See a penny, pick it up. All the day you'll have good luck", this penny is offered to Alastair Haines for his incredible WikiWorld endeavors:-- Buster7 ( talk) 03:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Friendship Barnstar | |
For your most excellent efforts in friendship towards your fellow Wikipedians,
User:Ched Davis would like to award you the Barnstar of Friendship.
|
Puente La Reina
Stating that a term is used in a given context does not imply any agreement or disagreement with that usage, it simply states the usage exists.
Wikipedia is growing all the time, and many new people are getting involved in this article--that's great! But it means that some people do not understand our policies, and it is clear from the past few days' discussion that we need to sort some things out.
In other words, we do not distinguish between different types of articles because some policies apply to some and some policies do not apply to some. It goes without saying that only material that is relevant should go into an article.
Beyond that, our core policies are
WP:NPOV which states that all notable significant views about a topic must be represented neutrally;
WP:V which states that all notable significant views must also be verifiable. This does not mean that they have to be true or right or good.
In fact, Wikipedia editors are encouraged to add views thought to be false, wrong, or bad - as long as they are notable significant and verifiable; meaning there is evidence available to anyone that people actually hold this view.
Closely related to WP:V is WP:RS, which states that views should come from reliable sources. Reliable does not mean true or right or good, it means well established. The New York Post, The Daily News, The Village Voice, The Wall Street Journal--all represent a wide range of views and it is likely that everyone has contempt for at least one of these newspapers. But, they are all considered reliable sources for the news.
Finally, WP:NOR, no original research. Even if we read through lots of news reports and develop a sophisticated analysis of the news based on solid research, we cannot put it into an article. The bottom line is, editors simply do not put our own views into articles. That really covers the main policies that should guide us in writing this article.
Some people have thrown around the phrase BLP, which stands for "Biography of Living Persons." BLP does not refer to a type of article - like I said, from the perspective of Wikipedia policies, there aren't any different types of articles, all articles are subject to the same policies.
BLP does not say that some articles are biographies; it says that sometimes we add to an article biographical content and it provides some important points about how to do that. WP:BLP basically reiterates what I just said: we need to comply with the same policies we comply with in articles on gravity and Australia and golf.
What the BLP policy says is that when we add biographical information to an article we need to be especially careful to use reliable sources, most assuredly if the material is contentious. It doesn't say we cannot add contentious material, only that, if we do, we need to bend over backwards to make sure the source is reliable.
Moreover, we should be careful not to write in a titillating or sensationalistic style. Likewise, when we add criticisms (which NPOV practically demands we will) we have to be sure they come from reliable sources.
Slrubenstein Talk 19:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC) from Archive 32
Buster7 has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to
__________________(video game), you will be
blocked from editing. --
Buster7 (
talk) 01:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
RETRVED FROM TALK:ARTHUR_RUBIN
If you read WP:TALK it gives me the permission to remove those comments.-- Otterathome ( talk) 14:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Very enjoyable and informative articles. (Bombardment/Second Walls of Brussels) I'm glad that the number of articles pertaining to Belgium is growing, and that an editor of your obvious ability is envolved. I'm rather new to the "hands-on" history of Belgium so I really appreciated their clarity. Thanks.--Buster7 (talk) 22:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Hej Buster,
you keep removing the remark that in Dutch jokes Belgians are often depicted as _________. While this is biased in itself, the practice is a fact (just like the fact that in Belgian jokes the Dutch are often depicted as being greedy and moneygrubbing). If you insist to remove the fact that Belgians are depicted as __________ you should remove the remark on jokes on Germans as well. No more are "the Germans" arrogant as "the Belgians" are _______. It seems you are a bit biased yourself (perhaps this has to do with you Belgian ancestry?)....Richard 13:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It's a way of announcing when a job is done, something like "voila" in French. If you're giving someone a complicated list of instructions, you might say it when you get to the end. But I don't know anything about the etymology, sorry! — FIRE! in a crowded theatre... 18:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Hej Buster,
I've got a small hint for you: when you're including links to pages on Wikipedia you seem to have a preference for "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XXX" which results in " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XXX". You could also write [[User talk:XXX]] which results in User talk:XXX. The links lead to the same web page but the first is an external link and the second, an internal link. And since you don't walk out the front door to get from the living room to the bedroom (or so I presume) why would you do so with hyperlinks? If you do want to add a link to a web page outside of Wikipedia the preferred way of doing so is [http://some.web/page.htm Description of that page] which results in Description of that page. Just to let you know.
Richard 07:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I request Civility. I am editing in good faith. It is nice to see that your are so interested in the articles I am visiting. The attention is gratifying. I don't understand how we can be visiting/editing the same articles all the time. It has to be more than just coincidence. The Low Countries I can understand...a common interest. Hans Brinker...maybe a chance meeting. But...TIM MOORE!!!..a deceased Illinois comedian???? Now thats a s-t-r-e-t-c-h!!! I ask for a truce. What is your purpose in stalking me? It doesn't seem to be quality editing. It seems to be something else.--Buster7 (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Buster7, I am not saying that me popping up in those articles is a coincidence. I will try to give you an explanation later today. (I'm sorry, but I don't have much time now.) Mr X ( talk) 08:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I have decided to take a vacation from the Low Countries area and articles related to it...(except for the one just now)..it is hard not to edit. Please do not follow me!-- Buster7 ( talk) 12:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
No problem, I also edit other people's userpage! See also User:Stevenfruitsmaak/Userboxes:
their, to, your, its, ... | This users english is far from being perfect!. |
--
Steven Fruitsmaak (
Reply) 14:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Definition: a sour fellow that does not brook dissent; someone that does not play well with others; someone who needs a hug! LOL
Why are you doin' what your doin'? What your doin is un-doin everything I'm doin'. Which isn't a nice thing to do. 'Cause then I have to un-do what you do when what you do has undone what I do. I do what I do...and your right there...behind me...to un-do it. That's not right! Do I undo what you do....NO! Who are you to do what your doin'? We both know it has very little to do with doin' what's right. Please...stop doin what your doin...or someone else may have to do what they do to get you to stop doin' what you do. You've done it before, do-ode (dude). This isn't the first time and I'm not your first stalking victim. Do something else!!! Do a "doobie"!!! In the words of Frank Sinatra, "doobie, doobie, do"--Buster7 (talk) 00:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Retrieved
I have attempted to resolve an issue with ________________...but he continues to stalk me. His actions continue even now. I have tried to make light of it so as not to give him the satisfaction of an angry reply. I do not want to get into the long-winded, verbose, never ending conversation that he does. But...I can not do ANY editing without him coming behind me and undoing them...in reverse order the articles are... 1) White Bass. 2) Fremont, Wisc. 3) Desiderus Erasmus. 4) Hans Brinker and the Silver skates. 5) Tim Moore. 6) Low Countries 7) Belgium 8) Dutch customs and ettiquette.
There are more. But these should show a preponderance of action that is contrary to Wiki-Standards. Earlier ..before I left for work...I was ready to move on and leave the Low Countries to Iblardi and his ilk. It wasn't worth the aggrevation.....Please respond ASAP. --Buster7 (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)(Retrieved)
I think I did it right....ie...I just submitted a formal request for a dispute resolution.--Buster7 (talk) 01:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)(retrieved)
The same goes for the provocative accusations above. I merely observe that this user is putting up a masquerade. Normally I am not at all quick in accusing other editors. Just for the record, how can I be a "Right Fighter"? I engage in factual discussions on talk pages all the time (for instance [2], [3], [4], etc., including with the above user ( [5], [6]). I am generally a cautious editor ( [7], [8]). I do help newcomers ( [9]) and I correct myself at times when it becomes clear that I made a mistake (removing my own contribution after a talk page discussion: [10]). User:Buster7 also created an article of questionable notability (probably taken from the cover of the book he was using for his edits on the Low Countries: [11]), which I didn't touch since I saw no factual inaccuracies. Hardly an editor who "has to be right" at all costs, it seems. Mr X ( talk) 17:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, I think that someone who is genuinely concerned with this issue does not post frivolous reactions like this one: [12]. And this explanation [13] about a "brother" who allegedly has been checking all of this user's contributions and has done so for years (while the user professes to be a newcomer) doesn't sound convincing to me. And even here -- a Jesuit teacher who is an ex-marine? How plausible is that? Mr X ( talk) 18:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
(Whatever story you made up about what I wrote or who I am, is Your story. It really has very little to do with me. Like your interpretations of my edits they are far from the truth)
This is my final talk with you. At such a time when an administrator gets involved in our "situation", I will respond to any and all claims that you make. But until then, I will not respond to any request to talk. About anything. So, dont bother to ask.-- Buster7 ( talk) 20:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Buster7. Maybe I got a bit carried away and misinterpreted your behaviour. I have given it some thought, done some research on the internet, and come to the conclusion that I might have been overreacting to your contributions. You may after all just be who you profess to be. I should have taken into account the fact that different people have different ways of expressing themselves and shouldn't have been that suspicious towards you. Looking at it from your perspective I can see now that it comes across as bullying, and I hate to be a bully. I'm sorry I have been questioning your motives. Please accept my apologies. Mr X ( talk) 20:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Lets agree we got off on the wrong foot. However it happened, whatever was said..is "water under the bridge." I haven't heard anything from editor assistance and at this juncture I consider it a dead issue. I'll let it (my request) sit there just to see if someone responds and how long it takes (an experiment)...but I wont pursue it. My biggest worry is that, down the line, you will "stalk" someone else. So...if, down the line, you get that strange, mis-trusting urge...let me know. Really!
I dont want to share emails or have a cup of coffee; I just DON'T want to have an enemy out there in WikiLand. I have a feeling we will both be editing here for awhile. Who knows what the future holds? But, from my side of the street, there is NO animosity, NO anger, NO need for revenge.
My intentions are to edit in good faith. I really do appreciate your change of heart/direction/mind. It's not easy. Take Care...Bedankt, eh!-- Buster7 ( talk) 04:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
User subpageWolf River rig article:
You missed an angle bracket with the closing </ref> tag, which messed it up. I fixed it. Btw, you may want to look at {{ Cite book}} and other citation templates that help you format a citation. -- soum talk 10:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Mumford, David (1999). The Red Book of Varieties and Schemes. Lecture notes in mathematics 1358. Springer-Verlag. doi: 10.1007/b62130. ISBN 354063293X.
some unsolicited advice... When linking to a wikipedia article you should use two sets of brackets: [[ ]]. When linking to an external website you should only use one: [ ]. A wikilink to the article on google looks like this: Google and results in this: Google. Linking to the google website looks like this: [14] and results in this: [15]. You have a tendency to link to external sites with an unnecessary set of brackets, so that your contributions often look like this [ [15]] and result in this: 16.
There is no one definition of "language" that is agreed upon by all and appropriate for all purposes. As a result, there can be disagreement, even among speakers or linguistic experts, as to whether two varieties represent dialects of a single language or two distinct languages. For this part of ISO 639, judgments regarding when two varieties are considered to be the same or different languages are based on a number of factors, including linguistic similarity, intelligibility, a common literature, the views of speakers concerning the relationship between language and identity, and other factors.
"If I were king," Brel himself once said, "I would send all the Flemings to Wallonia and all the Walloons to Flanders for six months. Like military service. They would live with a family and that would solve all our ethnic and linguistic problems very fast. Because everybody's tooth aches in the same way, everybody loves their mother, everybody loves or hates spinach. And those are the things that really count."
"In Flanders, standard Dutch is the mother language of only a few, because that role is bestowed to the dialect"...Hans Van de Velde
"tussentaal"...in-between language or "verkavelings vlaams"...idiomatic differences...intelligible...can an oost vlaanderen nan west vlaanderen verstaan?...voortrekkers=pioneers...
The Friesian breed is centuries old. The Romans were among the first to mention the Friesian as a strong working horse. Because of the breeds' strength, docility and endurance ,the Friesian was pressed into service by German knights as a war horse during the Crusades. The Friesian received an infusion of Andalusian blood when the Spanish occupied The Netherlands during the 16th century. These horses became much valued as saddle and carriage horses by the nobility, and can been seen portrayed in the art of the old Dutch Masters. The industrial revolution nearly wiped out the Friesian breed. Careful and strict breeding practices have brought this Baroque horse back from the brink of extinction. The history, constitution and temperament of theFriesian has closely paralled that of the "Spanish " horses mentioned in Christine deHerrera's article above and modern day Friesian owners are drawn to this breed for the very same reasons as noted above.
=
I see you have fallen into "The Deletion Web"...suggestion #1) Try not to move. That will only bring you know who. #2) Find another administrator that is NOT a deletionist. At least you may find out why it was deleted. #3) Keep Sailing (editing)..."keep the wind in your sails" #4) Have Fun.-- Buster7 ( talk) 02:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED
Can you help me out in any way? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.Thank you, Ebayrockstar ( talk) 02:51, 29 June RETREAVED
I'll read the article but I'm not really sure I can help. Note: use "double colon (:)" to indent your comment or reply from the previous entry in a running conversation. When you check out
delete or edit you will see there are other ways for an editor to handle previous chat. Be assured, however, that your actions are far from vandalism. Any administrator would see the good faith error of a 'newbie"...well...almost any administrator--
Buster7 (
talk) 04:29, 29 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED
I am surprised and dissapointed at how this editor, Ebayrockstar, is being treated. While his article may or may not be the most blatant attempt at free-advertising (POV) that doesn't mean he should be attacked as if he were a rabid dog that just entered the room. The article is not garbage. I've seen garbage. And it certainly isn't terrible. Is this how we should treat a new guest at Wilipedia? I don't think so.--
Buster7 (
talk) 05:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
see
WP:Newbies--
Buster7 (
talk) 05:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED
TNTRide is a notable company. I'm tired of trying to justify that. Yes I'm trying to help them out and yes the CEO does have a brain tumor. There are things in life that are good deeds. I believe in doing good deeds, I also believe in karma. I'm not backing down I will compose a noteworthy article for them and it will be superb. I'm not sure what Wikipedia classifies notable as, but a company that has a trademarked logo and branding would classify pretty notable in my book. Not to mention their graphics designer just happens to be Chris Angel's graphic designer "Stefanie Lynn Evans". I'm sorry but I just don't agree with all this utter discrimination, however if your willing to help me accomplish this I would be very grateful. I want to make friends here not enemies. Please help me do good for them and show me the ways to write a good Wikipedia article. Ebayrockstar ( talk) 02:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)RETREAVED '
Thank you for your recent intervention and concern. I'm glad you understand the energy that overflowed at the cabal site. Thank you for the steps you took to prevent almost definite retaliation should it have been discovered by the "wrong" editor. Together let's look at something tho. Lets look at what one little sentence can create. Everything that followed my edit at that site was unnecessary and would NOT have happened if the first editor had merely communicated instead of reverted. I am very reasonable. But, his "trigger happy" style set into motion all that followed: wasted time and words that should have been devoted to the task at hand-editing articles. Envolvement by 5-6-7 editors. Let's you and I consider that what happened to me is multiplied enourmously all across Wikipedia since rapid deletion is seen by some as their calling. At this point it is just an observation. But, as we can see, the actions of one effect many. I regret the "bastion" sentence but I don't think I could have predicted the firestorm that followed. Thanks again-- Buster7 ( talk) 11:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC) Retrieved from_____________----
|
|
}}
The norm of reciprocity is the social expectation that people will respond to each other in kind -- returning benefits for benefits, and responding with either indifference or hostility to harms. The social norm of reciprocity often takes different forms in different areas of social life, or in different societies. All of them, however, are distinct from related ideas such as gratitude, the Golden Rule, or mutual goodwill. See Reciprocity (social and political philosophy) for an analysis of the concepts involved.
"real research in classical languages using primary sources following established historical methods"...Slrubenstein
"Tis as if God himself had stepped out of the clouds to reward me, oh, delightful day this...Pizza Puzzle (Jimbo Wales visit)
The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory, first developed by the German syndicalist sociologist Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties. It states that all forms of organization, regardless of how democratic or autocratic they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop into oligarchies. The reasons for this are the technical indispensability of leadership, the tendency of the leaders to organize themselves and to consolidate their interests; the gratitude of the led towards the leaders, and the general immobility and passivity of the masses.
The term is commonly used to describe any group involved in overzealous enforcement of specific tastes or views (e.g. "the style Gestapo", "the political-correctness Gestapo", "Gestapo tactics")....The power of the Gestapo most open to misuse was called Schutzhaft - "protective custody", a euphemism for the power to imprison people without judicial proceedings.
This is pretty apparently someone looking to block/ban. This whole, "Don't answer back, or else" tactic has been used, from the days of the playground to the days of international politics, simply to ensure that someone replies. Such language is graceless and uncivil, because it is rhetorically designed to provoke. People who are civil seek to find ways to make sure that all sides are happy, not that anyone is silent. Trying to shove people through/out the door is the very definition of uncivil behavior.
6,000+ |
en | This user is a native speaker of the English language. |
![]() |
This user is from East-Flanders. |
![]() | According to
The Political Compass this user is: Economic Left (−2.25) and Social Libertarian (−2.87) |
![]() |
This user is from Antwerp. |
![]() | This user supports the De Rode Duivels |
![]() | This user is a citizen of the United States of America. |
![]() | This user lives in
Illinois, the Land of Lincoln. |
![]() | This user lives in or hails from Chicago. |
![]() |
![]() 12 | This user has visited 12 of the 208 countries in the world. |
![]() | This user assumes good faith. |
![]() | This user was a member of the League of Copyeditors. |
nl | Dutch These users can speak Dutch language. |
![]() | This user enjoys the works of Robert A. Heinlein. |
![]() | This user is a member of the Association of Mergist Wikipedians. |
![]() | This user rescues articles for the Article Rescue Squadron. |
![]() | This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. |
![]() | This user enjoys electronic music. |
![]() | This user enjoys playing poker. |
RC | This user drinks RC Cola. |
![]() | This user is a certified scuba diver. |
![]() | This user is just another brick in the Wall. |
![]() | This user studied at The Art Institute of Chicago. |
nl-be | This user has Flemish as native language. |
![]() | This user does NOT support the unification of Flanders and the Netherlands. |
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For your constant help making Wikipedia a nice place for all of us to stay. Miguel.mateo ( talk) 14:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
![]() |
A Lucky Penny | |
In the spirit of "See a penny, pick it up. All the day you'll have good luck", this penny is offered to Alastair Haines for his incredible WikiWorld endeavors:-- Buster7 ( talk) 03:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Friendship Barnstar | |
For your most excellent efforts in friendship towards your fellow Wikipedians,
User:Ched Davis would like to award you the Barnstar of Friendship.
|
Puente La Reina