User talk:Tekto9

Why don't you use the article's Talk page to see if you can garner any support for your desired major rewrite of the history section in United States--one that I don't think reflects what appears in any standard published reference works on U.S. history. Just because you can find a source for something doesn't mean it belongs in Wikipedia. We could find sources right now for the world being flat.—DCGeist (talk) 14:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Done . Cheers --Tekto9 (talk) 15:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Your fight for Truth
Beofre I begin, I'll give you a disclaimer, namely my behaviour towards certain users has acquired me a bad reputation with them, and I am probably considered juvenile, irrational and uncivil, but then one fights fire with fire. Your comments are reassuring and, as I have noticed from the foreign language Wikipedias, the "English" Wikipedia is severely lacking, mainly due to the "cabalism" of editors who refuse to allow all but their closest compatriots to add changes to the article. Wikipedia, certainly so for the English speaking version, is an encyclopedia of ignorance, half truths and poorly concealed lies, often dominated by individuals with very little interest in anything for themselves. Your fight for the truth on Wikipedia will be about as fruitful as a search for gold in a village privvy. However, it is encouraging to see philosophers still exist. The truth can be found, or at least a better, objective version, on the foreign language pages. The French Wikipedia isn't bad. Ciao.


 * Thank you dear anon for your touching, motivating and friendly words and for the attention you have devoted to my edition(s). We all, individually and collectively, have our deep imperfections that have to be worked out and that is an extremly slow task. Nevertheless, it is my belief that here, at the English language version, the manifested imperfections that you mention above may be transmuted in order to correspond to the higher goals which Wikipedia has set to itsef, mainly "change the world!". As the worldwide free encyclopedia Wikipedia is formed by us all, permanent or temporary contributing editors, simultaneously being the individuals who together form the 'world' itself; if we (myself included) make a constant effort to cultivate patience and human sympathy toward each others in our efforts to implement Truth, instead of dogma, it is possible that through Wikipedia the mentioned higher goal may be achieved in a good measure; my belief :). Anyway, thank you once more and best wishes into your constructive efforts, Au revoir --Tekto9 (talk) 17:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You'll be glad to know that you are not the only user who has been thoroughly demonized in attempting to contribute to perhaps the most strictly censored article on Wikipedia. Well-sourced, well-intended contributions should be given at least some ponderance. Even if they don't seem acceptable by current standards, you will have at least given other contributors something to think about. That is how progress occurs.

Your words of wisdom are welcome by many. M5891 (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)