User talk:Doublestandard

December 2015
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Men's Health (magazine). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 22:04, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

So speaking the truth is vandalism in our double standard society huh? So then tell me what's false about it? Thank God I didn't donate to this website, I spread the new to my friends and everyone also of what wikipedia really is. They're better charities that can benefit more from it anyway, so all good.


 * If you think what you are saying is true and it belongs on Wikipedia, please cite your sources properly. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 22:19, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

....are you kidding me? go look at the links I provided please, that's says it all, what other proof is needed? Those links go directly to each magazine, what else do you need. I you can't see it's discrimination based on that, then you should not be administering a site like wikipedia....

Anyway I'm done here, I thought Wikipedia was a place where anyone can edit as long as what they're saying was true. I've used this site since it started and actually donated to you guys in the past. Also if I cared to, I can go edit 100s of posts because I have access to 100s of pcs with different ips and such, but I won't do that because it's a was of my time, you time editing and also I'm not a person like that.

It is sad to me that even when speaking the truth these days, if it applies to men's rights it's considered bad, it's a sad society we live in, equality should be just that equality....and no more or less.


 * Sorry, I know from personal experience how upsetting it can be to be reverted as a new user.


 * You're welcome to stick around and contribute to our encyclopedia, but there are a few general policies (applying to everyone equally) you need to be aware of. It can be frustrating, but WP:Original research is not allowed. That means looking at sources and drawing your own conclusions from the information in them, instead of selecting some information already contained in the source. The reason is essentially practical; we need to be able to agree, and that's hard enough on the Internet. You might take data like magazine staff rosters and deduce that men are being discriminated against; a feminist might draw opposite conclusions, arguing perhaps that women are being excluded from more "serious" media positions, or that society devalues women's media and men (being more privileged) are able to avoid this unprestigious environment. This could easily lead into a long, contentious battle, which could never be satisfyingly resolved because there's not enough information in mutually acceptable sources.


 * So if you want to continue to contribute, you'll have to come to terms with that restriction. I suggest you read WP:SOAPBOX for the official policy on this, and WP:ADVOCACY for a better explanation of why it's a bad idea to come in planning to advance a political agenda.


 * Best of luck, FourViolas (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank for you response FourViolas, although I would not say it's a political agenda I was getting at. Wikipedia in general has so many things listed that are untrue, you would think that if you list something that's true, it would not be a problem. Also don't take that the wrong way, I like Wikipedia and have used it for many year, even donated in the past, but I always saw it as a more open thinking website where the truth would not be deleted, but rather just stated. In fact, the ironic thing is that I didn't know wikipedia was so political, now that you pointed it out. The sad part about it is that what I posted before was the truth, and not false at all, yet it was deleted, while there're parts of Wikipedia where false information are all over. I'm not blaming you as an editor or staff for that also, as it's hard to control and open website where everyone is allowed to post whatever they feel without the facts, but when actual facts are posted and then it's deleted because of the opinions of such editors, well that's when it's not an open space anymore. This sort of controlled environment where you can only post facts that the editors agree with means wikipedia is not what it use to be, and the content doesn't show the full truth, which is not what this website reflected before. If I contributed something that was false, then I would be completely wrong, and I would not care, but when facts and the truth are being deleted, then a website that does that can't be a useful source of anything, because you don't get the full picture of any topic but the picture that's painted by staff.

As far as your comments about feminists (although I don't see why they have to be involved in everything involving men, but they seem to be as you just brought it up here) there're facts in Wikipedia that are false but are posted here by feminists, yet it's not deleted and still on Wikipedia. For all the "true" facts they post, I don't see any issues with that, and no one should. Yet my post was deleted on the grounds of feminists mentality, yet I never mentioned anything about feminism. Much like most places on the internet anything about Men's rights is automatically change to a feminist issue, and that's sort of my point, equality should be equality. It's sad what this site has come to honestly, since it's just another site where any mention (of the truth mind you) in regards to men's rights has to automatically lead to feminism or a feminist issue. Either way, best of luck to you also and thanks for your response again.