User talk:Breslauer~enwiki

Hello. Please stop reverting other editors at Creation-evolution controversy and instead discuss edits on the Talk page of that article. You should be aware that Wikipedia has several policies to prevent disputes over content from becoming disruptive, and that if you continue in this manner you risk being blocked from editing. Please review the links in the welcome message below, and in particular please read our guidelines on edit-warring and consensus. Thanks.

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

S HEFFIELD S TEEL TALK 18:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome, SheffieldSteel!

Was I doing something wrong by changing the page or was it whoever cancelled my edit?

How and by whom is the judgment made?

I explained my edit on the article's page, but let me expand on it for you: the (again) current version misleadingly positions the 'scientific consensus' against those who espouse [...] a particular creation myth'. This is a biased mix-up of different aspects of the controversy.

As you know the dispute/debate takes place on several levels, including scientific. Scientists on one side of the debate, the vast majority, argue with scientists, the 'vast' minority, on the other side. They use logic, refer to facts, publish, refute and so on.

Whatever you think of the quality of the debate, it is a scientific debate nonetheless!

Juxtaposing in the same very important introductory sentence 'scientific consensus' with 'creation mhyth' is a misrepresentation. I rectified it.

Could you explain please what was wrong with that? (By the way: have you sent a similar admonition to the person who reverted my change?)

Regards Breslauer
 * Basically, the problem is that you removed information that was backed up by reliable sources, and replacing it with an unsourced and differently worded version. Adding information without sources, especially in an article like this, can be considered original research and is to be avoided. Even moreso, you kept adding your own slant after at least two reverts. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

TenPoundHammer,

I can find in no time a back-up for the description of the debate I consider fairer. That's not the point, I guess. The introduction in question is evidently anti-creation/intelligent-design. The problem is to find fairer definition, not to hide behind sources.

We're talking here about values, attitudes and prejudices - and I spotted and demonstrated one. Can we establish an intellectual contact or is it purely technical?--Breslauer (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Do arguments and logic count in Wikipedia or is it only about finding an adequate 'authority' for your views?
 * If you think that the article is biased, take it up on the talk page. That's the best I can tell you. This change, revert, change pattern is a good way to get blocked. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Breslauer. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Breslauer~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 11:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)