User talk:Heenan73

= Work in progress =

Wikipedia - Facing the Truth
I joined Wikipedia very much an innocent; I'd vaguely heard of this open-source site, and eventually decided to take a look. I liked what I found, particularly the ethos, sophistication, and security methods (preserving history, etc.) I signed up; expecting to spend maybe half an hour a week tinkering and toning items with which I am familiar. That was not to be.

By pure chance, I quickly fell upon the Vampire Watermelon, and, almost as quickly, the Vampire Watermelon Fan Club.

A cursory read of VW reveals an obvious spoof; an examination of the history confirms not only the spoofines, but a failure (not through lack of trying) to either delete it, or edit it to take its rightful and appropriate place as a vampire joke.

Half an hour's Internet searching, plus three minutes with Terry Pratchett's fine book Carpe Jugulum confirms, beyond any sane doubt, that the item is a spoof, and - as much for users as for Wikipedia's reputation, it rquired some correction - and links to it required the context clarifying. I moved with some trepidation, having already perused the history of change and reversal, but i did not expect almost instant insults and rapid reversal - against all the evidence - by users who clearly had no real interest in the topic, and had never, ever, bothered to accertain the truth.

I resolved at the age of 12 never to let a bully have an easy time, so the decision to rise to the challenge came easily.

I shall persist with my attempts to get an honest and correct version of this story into the public arena. Sadly, I do not expect to win; the VWFC are too numerous and too unprincipled; they work as a team, having done all this before - I'm not suggesting for one moment they bother to conspire; I do not credit them with the intelligence required. I think that they think it's funny to harass anyone who stands up to their little "joke" at Wikipedia users' expense; they are of like mind.

I fully expect to be chucked out for 'not being a team player'; but I do not count vandals as team mates. I am more than willing to work with anyone who is willing to work towards the best Wikipedia we can attain - but so far, I have not had an opportunity.

I shall use this page for as long as I can to 'bank' disputed text until such time as it may be usable, and to record some of the excesses of the VWFC. I expect to build up an irrefutable case quickly and easily, and expect it to be refuted. A sad time for Wikipedia, but I follow the wiki's guiding principles, where others might not. Heenan73 23:44, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedist: Censored text
While Wikipedian is the generally accepted term for a person who writes and edits articles for Wikipedia, Wikipedist is arguably a more appropriate name, just as encyclopedist means someone who contributes to an encyclopedia.

The ending of Wikipedian, on the other hand, suggests someone who is part of a group or community. So in this sense, Wikipedians are people who form The Wikipedia Community; while a Wikipedist, in contrast, may work side by side with community members, but have a personal agenda, sometimes in competiton with the aims and objectives (and policies) of Wikipedia.

An example is those who spoof Wikipedia for reasons unknown, which may include personal amusement, graffiti or simple anti-establishment gestures.

Some take their agenda further, with loose-knit alliances of wikipedists supporting spoofs and the prevention of spoof correction.

With Wikipedia's credibility undermined by such behaviour, it might be argued that Wikipedists are a serious threat to the future of the project.

Example
The anti-Roma spoof Vampire watermelons is an interesting case in that the spoof has persisted for many months, despite repeated attempts by Wikipedians to remove it, correct it, or place links to it in context.

The Wikipedists defense is to challenge Wikipedians to 'prove them wrong', while the guiding principle of Wikipedia would suggest that the onus of proof lies supporters of the spoof.

The one source cited does not support their case.

The spoof has persisted long enough to be spreading across the web, with copycat mentions now being cited as proof, in a classic circle of falsehood. Heenan73 23:44, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Re Wikipedist - the content is not appropriate for an article in the main namespace. If you want to add to a page describing this behaviour as you see it, you might want to see http://meta.wikipedia.org - the Meta Wikipedia, which contains articles and discussions about Wikipedia(ns). Dysprosia 23:27, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * But false entries by the VWFC are appropriate in your view? I notice you intervened in my case, but not theirs? Heenan73 23:44, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * If you feel there is a factual error with one of the articles, you discuss it on that article's talk page. However, the previous content of Wikipedist essentially mirrors that of Wikipedians, save for your view of Wikipedian behaviour which is more suited for placement at Meta and a personal example (see also NPOV) that you placed, which is not suited for an article in the main namespace. Dysprosia 07:44, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * You choose to miss the point. That's a little sad, isn't it? I don't 'feel' there is an error; there are very obviously false entries, and endless discussion behind closed doors has (shock horror) failed to resolve the repeated and damaging vandalism.


 * No surprise that you choose to wave bureaucratic rules at me rather than assist. Do the VWFC need your permission to edit? Are they told to discuss it, rather than constantly reinstate rubbish? No. If you choose not to help, at least try not to hinder. The evidence of months demonstrates that only a public airing has a hope of success; I am not about to be harassed and reverted at every turn like those who have tried in the past to sort this. Rules are there to assist in achieving Wikipedia's aims; they need to be flexible enough to do this. Once 'enforcing the rules' becomes more important than the mission itself, it's probably time to go home.


 * I assure you I'll stick to Wikipedia's aims, but I regret I'll not let you drown me with red tape. Sorry. But thanks for your interest; do call again should you wish to address the real problem. Heenan73 08:42, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

What red tape? Articles that are best suited for Meta should be placed at Meta. I am not concerning nor wishing to concern myself with the validity of Vampire watermelon, but with the content Wikipedist article only. Dysprosia 09:01, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * You continue to choose to miss the point. Fine by me; I, on the other hand, am only interested in Vampire watermelon, and it's use as an example in Wikipedist. So you need not concern yourself with these issues; you carry on at Meta, I'll continue to campaign for accuracy and relevance in the real world. We have nothing to disagree about, nothing to discuss. All I want, no more, no less, is one accurate entry. Feel free not to help, not to be involved; your choice. But I repeat, if you choose not to help, please also choose not to hinder. Heenan73 14:51, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * The point is that the content at Wikipedist is not appropriate. I will submit this on Votes for deletion to get the community view of the page's content. Dysprosia 07:29, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Vampire - Censored Text
Even the mythology has its own mythology, with spoof attributions, tenaciously propogated by Wikipedists, such as the suggestion that in Roma tradition, melons and pumpkins may become vampires; see the article on vampire watermelons. - While no-one has found firm evidence (or even looked for it in Roma mythology), the spoof is guarded by its fan club.


 * Note: This is a particularly sad act of censorship, as it included a false accusation of self reference (where?). The text that replaces it is a racist slur on the Roma peoples - this features in the VW article, too; there is comes with an implication that the story's originator (Terry Pratchett - not credited!!) had also included this slur. A quick look at Carpe Jugulum totally exonerates Pratchett. Heenan73 23:44, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Vampire watermelon - Censored Text
Vampires and the vampire culture have become so well established that a mythology is growing up around the the mythology. Vampire watermelons have no place outside the novels of Terry Pratchett, but, as described below, they are attributed to the Roma. According to tradition, virtually any kind of melon or pumpkin kept more than ten days or after Christmas will become a vampire, rolling around on the ground and growling to pester the living. People have little fear of the vampire melons because of the creatures' lack of teeth. One of the main indications that a melon is about to undergo a vampiric transformation (or has just completed one) is said to be the appearance of a drop of blood on its skin. + While such spoofs probably do no harm - except perhaps to the credibility of Wikipedia - they have no place in the mainstream vampire legends, and the erroneous assertion of their accuracy might be construed as a slur on te Roma peoples and their gullibility.

The Legend
The belief in vampire watermelons is found in the Balkan peninsula of south-eastern Europe, attributed to the Roma people of the region.

According to this legend, virtually any kind of melon or pumpkin kept more than ten days or after Christmas will become a vampire, rolling around on the ground and growling to pester the living. People have little fear of the vampire melons because of the creatures' lack of teeth. One of the main indications that a melon is about to undergo a vampiric transformation (or has just completed one) is said to be the appearance of a drop of blood on its skin.


 * the version restored contains the legend, as above, but the introduction is palpably false, and should not havebeen restored:
 * "The belief in vampire watermelons is found in the Balkan peninsula of south-eastern Europe, apparently associated with the Roma people of the region."


 * Zero evidence has ever been offered that this fable has any connection with the Roma peoples; If this text is to be published, with the implied gullibility of the Roma, then the writers are duty-bound to support it with evidence. This is not about opinion; it's about fact - or lack of them! Heenan73 23:44, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

VM Chewing Gum - Removal allowed (so far!)
In October 1983, various Balkan heritage groups expressed dismay when Cadbury Schweppes, owner of the Bubblicious® brand of bubble gum, introduced a Halloween-inspired favor of bubble gum named Vampire Watermelon. Like the folk legend, the watermelon on the package appeared to be ominously rolling and oddly lacked teeth despite the 'vampire' adjective. The groups pressured Cadbury Schweppes to drop the name of the flavor, as they considered it a crass commercialization of their rich heritage. Cadbury Schweppes denied any prior knowledge of this piece of Balkan folklore and, to prevent alienating the lucrative Balkan-American market, changed the promotional flavor's name to "I Was a Teenage Watermelon". Regardless of the wit infused into the new name, the flavor did not sell well and was dropped from future Halloween promotions. Luckily, the incredibly popular "Regular Watermelon" flavor was unaffected by the controversy and continues to thrive in the marketplace to this day.


 * I removed this award-winning fiction from VM, and while the other items (see above) were reversed, this edit has (uniquely!) been allowed to remain. It is, however, too soon for celebration. I am fairly confiedent that C-S owned no chewing gum brands in 1983 (If this is restored, it's an easy check); and, of course, vampire watermelons had not yet been invented! Heenan73 23:44, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Arsenal F.C.
Please do not call me a vandal again. I've opened a discussion at Talk:Arsenal_F.C. if you would care to join in. It would be appreciated if you do not revert my edits again before you have discussed this further. Qwghlm (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I speak as I find, and do not appreciate bullies. You could have initiated the discussion BEFORE you vandalized my work, but chose not to. I worked for wikipedia in good faith, and I believe my work added to the page. Whether it was 'news' or a a 'surprise' is neither here nor there. Do what you will; you obviously have no interest in my views, so I'll not waste my time or yours. - Heenan73

WikiProject Google
Thanks for the invitation - alas, I am not here often enough to do it justice. Most of my edits now are corrections that I spot a need for while searching for info myself. Heenan73 (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for July 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Little, Brown Book Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Galbraith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=573293898 your edit] to Tesco may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:36, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * the Union flag under the Red Tractor logo, claimed to give a guarantee of UK origin. cite web | url = http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10312182/Its-all-Double-Dutch-at-Tesco-as-
 * Hi, I'm afraid none of this makes sense to me; I have tried to apply the reference syntax used elsewhere; no easy task, as it seems to vary. It may be that you posted before I made typo corrections, in which case, don't worry - it's fixed Heenan73 (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited VG (shop), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Franchise (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Pointing out that you are a vandal and a disgrace to Wikipedia is not an attack, you idiot, it's a mere statement of fact. If the truth hurts, I can only suggest you run home to mummy and stop messing up Wikipedia. Now go away and stop wasting my time Heenan73 (talk) 00:47, 20 November 2013 (UTC) Reminder to self - this relates to vandalism by ViperSnake151 at CryptoLocker Heenan73 (talk) 01:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Filth (TV channel)


The article Filth (TV channel) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * TV channel with no sources to be found at all.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wgolf (talk) 21:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)