User:Bsroiaadn/My beliefs on Wikipedia

This is about my beliefs on Wikipedia, will most likely be full of rants. I'll finish this later.

Editors

 * If you tell a user about something they are doing incorrectly or could be doing better, on their talk page, and they remove it without talking to you about it or even attempting to fix it, that's a major sign of immaturity.

Images

 * Although I understand why certain images are not suitable for Wikipedia (mostly for them to evade lawsuits), but it can be really annoying when legitimate images are deleted, one contributing factor as to why some editors leave Wikipedia.

Vandals

 * Equally as immature as the editors that disregard advice, vandals come on here and type something then save it. And for what? For it to be there for 5 seconds before it gets reverted? It'd be much more fun to go and troll on myspace or even (removed to not break rule 1, if you know what I mean), but...Wikipedia? Nice choice, idiots. At least if you troll on myspace or somewhere else, people won't be able to delete it, wouldn't that make more sense? Now, I'm not condoning vandalism/trolling on any site whatsoever, I just don't understand why Wikipedia would be the place they choose.


 * This could be in either vandals, editors, or both. People who insist on asserting their on POV on any subject. It's ok to do it once if they don't know, but if they don't stop when their told...then it's bad. It can be really annoying going and reverting the edit to keep the article POV-free, and it usually takes an admin (no offense to them) a long long time to get around to blocking them for an hour or two to cool things off.

Admins

 * I would love to be an admin, I think I'd do well at it...but with being an admin comes many more responsibilities. Ofcourse, being responsible with your new tools, but mostly....if you do something wrong...they take it down on you much harder than if you were a "normal" editor, because you should know better....it just amazes me how some admins just plain..well...don't know better


 * I have come across a couple sysops who have blocked people just because they didn't like what they said/did, even if they did nothing wrong. For example, if someone went against an admin, the admin would block them...simply because the editor didn't agree with the admin on something.


 * Some people deserve to be admins....until they pass RfA. What I meant by that is...they are great contributors before hand, but afterwards the become power-crazy and use their newly-gained tools for negative actions.

Note:
I have nothing against admins, just stating what I've observed. (Most) admins have done a lot of work to get where they are, and (most) definitely deserve it. Admins do a lot of work on Wikipedia, they are greatly needed.