Talk:FidoNews

Purpose of Wikipedia
It is NOT Wikipedia's purpose to be a venue for this publication. See this policy: What Wikipedia is not, especially this and this section. Do NOT post the FidoNews publication on this page. – Chris53516 (Talk) 18:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Please quit defaming the Fidonews website. -- WackerWhippet
 * No, you stop vandalizing Wikipedia. You do not know what you are doing. NEVER edit or delete ANYONE's comments. That is incredibly rude. Furthermore, read the policies above, and DO NOT revert my edits again. You may post an external link to an example, but you MAY NOT post an example on the page. Furthermore, this is NOT "the Fidonews website." If you or the creators of FidoNews need a website, Wikipedia is NOT the place to have one. – Chris53516 (Talk) 20:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

User:WackerWhippet
This user has been vandalizing this page as well as FidoNet. Please revert the edits of this user, unless he/she becomes sane. – Chris53516 (Talk) 21:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Wiki Fidonews
If you don't want a Wiki for Fidonews, then have it removed completely. Otherwise, please quit defaming our Fidonews WIKI!! And YES -- an example IS permissable!!!! Go back and re-read YOUR REFERENCES before making a fool of yourself again! WackerWhippet

Again and Again
I really want to know -- in a civil tone, please explain to me why you guys continually deface and vandalize our Fidonews wiki?? This is knowledge and it conforms with all the rules and regulations.

What I see that's happened here at Wiki is that a bunch of kids (this is my perception) have decided they need to be "online gods" of sorts, and if they don't get their way, then the simply make it their way and ban those who get in their way. This is an honest to goodness good Wiki, and because you don't "like" it, then you want to vandalize it (in the name of editing) and ban those attempting to contribute. Again -- this is (our) perception of what's this has come to based on your comments, your vandalization, and your raves.... If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate a civil explanation, but I suspect you'll only attempt to justify your online godlike behavior. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WackerWhippet (talk • contribs)


 * This is not the FidoNews wiki; this is Wikipedia. The edits you are making do not conform to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and in fact fall within Wikipedia's definitions of vandalism and spamming. You have been consistently ignoring warnings that your edits are inappropriate, and for this I have requested that you be blocked.  Psychonaut 23:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No, our posts DO conform. You just don't like it.  Your comment simply justifies what we originally thought.  You've replaced valid links with invalid links, and removed all of our explanations, history, "everything"..


 * You don't like it so you have those who contribute banned from Wikipedia. That's really very very sad indeed...  Even now you continue to delete all the hard work we have done by contributing valid and relevant content to this Wiki because you don't like it.  I do remember a time when certain people used to control the dissemination of information by burning books.  By eliminating our content, you have become no better than those people.  Please compare your acts with the acts of those before you and -- if you've a shred of decency inside, you'll see the perception that others have of your actions. 70.165.64.249

Changed fidonet.ca to Fidotel.org
Changed fidonet.ca/fidonews/ to fidotel.org because fidonet.ca doesn't exist anymore. Fidotel.org is the official site for Fidonews. 138.162.0.42


 * What you say is not true. I checked both pages, and reverted your edits. &mdash; Chris53516 (Talk) 15:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)