User:Charlesdrakew/Dark side

Snippets from the dark side
From Conservapedia talk pages;

WARNING

You will unblock DonCherry; you will not make malicious blocks except for vandalism from now on; you will discuss further block intentions with senior admins first; and you will NEVER contradict any senior admin again. Karajou 14:05, 14 December 2009 (EST)


 * I take it you've never heard of DonCherry then? When I see a Canadian "celebrity" modifying an article about another Canadian celebrity, while swearing on the talk page, I consider it impersonation. There's nothing malicious about removing him. But he's unblocked, so there you are. DouglasA 14:05, 14 December 2009 (EST)


 * If you believe you were justified in blocking him, then email Karajou. Keep it off talk pages, and don't just re-block after Karajou unblocks. JacobB 14:11, 14 December 2009 (EST)


 * Thanks


 * watch the blocks

Don't ask for citations

This user may be unfamiliar with our practices here, all he was doing was asking for references. Cut him some slack and explain on his talk page that very obvious things, like bison being from north america, don't necessarily need sources. JacobB 20:51, 14 December 2009 (EST)

That would be fair, if the user hadn't already added the same thing to a reference section of another article. DouglasA 20:53, 14 December 2009 (EST)

That article has references, yes, but maybe he's from Wikipedia, where every sentence has half a dozen sources after it. All I'm saying is, let's hang back until we're sure they're vandals. We don't want to scare off legitimate editors. JacobB 20:54, 14 December 2009 (EST)

See, the block of Crazy is exactly what I'm talking about. Maybe he doesn't KNOW that we don't copy from wikipedia. JacobB 20:57, 14 December 2009 (EST)

Jake, countless vandals have replaced our articles with WP's for a long time. That one is obvious as can be. DouglasA 20:57, 14 December 2009 (EST)

Yes, many have before. But new editors weren't here for that. We are getting a wave a new people who have never heard of Conservapedia before, and maybe he thought, "Oh, there can't be any liberal bias in algebra, so I'll just post material from the wikipedia page and help this site out!" JacobB 20:59, 14 December 2009 (EST)

I can't imagine anyone would actually think that. Copying bits from wikipedia, maybe, but wholesale replacement of articles would not make sense to even the least astute editor. DouglasA 21:01, 14 December 2009 (EST)

Maybe you're right. If they are a legit editor, they'll heed my warning about copying from wikipedia. If not, they'll reveal themselves through their vandalism and we'll block them. JacobB 21:03, 14 December 2009 (EST)

United States talkpage

I am surprised that the article seems to not be completed yet, considering this is an American website. It kind of throws in a bunch of the 1800s into the expansion section, and doesn't go into the Civil War, imperialism, World War I, so on and so forth. Obviously articles for all those aforementioned sections exist here, some being quite lengthy, so I will gladly start to add more to it.

My concern though is simply that the page is not completed, am I missing something? I won't edit it if the page is supposed to be this way. Sol1221 18:26, 22 February 2010 (EST)


 * Are you here to contribute or to nitpick? DouglasA 18:28, 22 February 2010 (EST)


 * I am here to contribute and of course I am willing to. I wouldn't call what I wrote "nitpicking" simply pointing out that the page was lacking and incomplete. My concern was that there might be a reason it was incomplete; at the top of this talk page there is a banner saying "Due to the controversial nature of this article, it has been locked by the Administrators to prevent edit wars or vandalism," so I wasn't really sure if the article was being rewritten by someone after some vandalism, or whatever. Sol1221 18:32, 22 February 2010 (EST)


 * As I can see from your edit history, you're much interested in defending liberals and arguing than actually contributing to the encyclopedia. If you're not willing to do so, I suggest you go to wikipedia. DouglasA 18:34, 22 February 2010 (EST)


 * Please, just address my concern. I am not here to argue or nitpick and that argument where I "defended liberals" was simply a mistake on my part where I WAS nitpicking. I don't consider myself a liberal, and I really just want to see if I have Conservapedia's blessing in filling out this page.Sol1221 18:38, 22 February 2010 (EST)

Washing

 * User:Davida002/sandbox
 * User:DavidAllenOfficial/sandbox


 * Sockpuppet investigations/John.V.1112